By David J. Jonsson
George W. Bush in his speech of Speech of September 5, 2006 discussed the Global War on Terror.
The terrorists who attacked us on September the 11th, 2001,
are men without conscience -- but they're not madmen. They kill in the name of
a clear and focused ideology, a set of beliefs that are evil, but not
Clash of Ideologies: The Making of the Christian and Islamic Worlds) These al Qaeda terrorists
and those who share their ideology are violent Sunni extremists. They're driven
by a radical and perverted vision of Islam that rejects tolerance, crushes all
dissent, and justifies the murder of innocent men, women and children in the
pursuit of political power. They hope to establish a violent political utopia across
the Middle East, which they call a "Caliphate" -- where all would be ruled
according to their hateful ideology. Osama bin Laden has called the 9/11
attacks -- in his words -- "a great step towards the unity of Muslims and
establishing the Righteous " [Caliphate]."
This caliphate would be a totalitarian Islamic empire
encompassing all current and former Muslim lands, stretching from Europe to
North Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. We know this because al
Qaeda has told us. About two months ago, the terrorist Zawahiri -- he's al
Qaeda's second in command -- declared that al Qaeda intends to impose its rule
in "every land that was a home for Islam, from [Spain (Andalusia)] to Iraq. He
went on to say, "The whole world is an open field for us."
We know what this radical empire would look like in
practice, because we saw how the radicals imposed their ideology on the people
of Afghanistan. Under the rule of the Taliban and al Qaeda, Afghanistan was a
totalitarian nightmare -- a land where women were imprisoned in their homes,
men were beaten for missing prayer meetings, girls could not go to school, and
children were forbidden the smallest pleasures like flying kites.(Suggested
reading: The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini.) Religious
police roamed the streets, beating and detaining civilians for perceived
offenses. Women were publicly whipped. Summary executions were held in Kabul's
soccer stadium in front of cheering mobs. And Afghanistan was turned into a
launching pad for horrific attacks against America and other parts of the
civilized world -- including many Muslim nations.
Apocalyptic Teaching of Islam
book Islamic Economics and the Final Jihad: The Muslim
Brotherhood to the Leftist/Marxist – Islamist Alliance, in Chapter 2 I wrote:
short story, "The Metamorphosis," Franz Kafka described the
transformation of a human into a vermin. He could also have written the plot
for the mutation of the Christian nations into the coming new caliphate--one
world under Islam--a world without borders. After all, Gregor Samsa found
himself transformed into an insect one morning. Thus, Samsa lies in a room,
examines his new physical state, and considers how he will be able to explain
being late for work. Samsa does not waste any time thinking about why he has become
an insect and how to escape the situation. Instead, there is only apathy, quiet
resignation--the man accepts the undeniability of the surreal situation. He
lies quietly with shallow breath--thinking, feeling, and acting as if he were
not that much of a difference between the metamorphosis of a person into an
insect and that of a group of states into a caliphate.
fate is befalling the West--European countries and North America. They question
nothing, they do nothing, and they observe their metamorphosis with little
discernible recognition, much less appropriate agitation. Once the smoke clears
from the stage and the new caliphate shows its true colors, they will catch
sight of an ugly creature--and that creature will be themselves.
clearly indicates that Islamic barbarism against Jews and Christians dates back
to the seventh century.
Moral-Trade-Deficit of the West exhibited by the growth of the
Radical-Center-Movement departing from the worldview of our Judeo-Christian
heritage, a vacuum has been created for the creation of the caliphate. And so
it is that the West morphing from dar-al-Harb to dar-al-Islam. A caliphate may
be coming soon to a country near you.
ultimate goal is the creation of "one world without borders under Islamic
rule," a totalitarian economic political theocracy based on Islamic law--Shariah
law. The Islamic
empire will not be limited to just the Spain-to-Indonesia region, for Islamists
have a global vision that requires control over non-Muslim countries, also, and
specifically the United States. Their universal ambitions certainly can be
stopped, but first they must be understood and resisted. Only when the West,
particularly the United States, realizes that the Islamists intend to replace
the U.S. Constitution with the Qur'an--Shariah law--will it enter the final era of
this war--the Final Jihad.
being addressed: has there been or when will there be a penetration of the
Western cultures and civilization that easily make takeover a fait accompli. The thesis is that the process is
under way. What we need to fear is the dog that does not bark at night.
Chapter 5 of Islamic Economics and the Final Jihad I wrote: Islam is more than a
religion; it is an economic and political movement set up following the Hijra
from Mecca to Medina. Muhammad set up the Nation-State and made himself the
first caliph. Islam, therefore, established the principle of a "kingdom of
God on earth." This
then required an army to defend the state.
of a caliph are these: Spiritual leader of Muslims, the one who guides Muslims in new
matters; Religious leader of the Muslims, the one who enforces Islamic law--Shariah; Political leader of Muslims, the one who conducts
relations with other states and administers government; and Military leader of Muslims, the one who orders and
conducts military affairs, in particular those regarding the conflict between dar
al-Islam and Dar
al-Harb. We call
this Nation-State the Ummah or Umma (the Muslim community or ideal state worldwide) and the
Islamic "world without borders."
Islamic sense, in Islamic religious history, al-Hijra was the migration or emigration of
the Prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Medina in 622 C.E. It became Year 1 of the
Muslim lunar calendar (AH). It was one of the great seminal events of Islamic
history and paved the way for the conquest of Mecca by Muhammad and the final
settlement of Islam in Arabia, from where it emerged to become a major world
Ummah is the body of the Muslims, as one
distinct and integrated community. The Ummah of Muhammad includes those who
lived in the past, those who are alive now, and those who will live in the
future. It can be subdivided into two groups: 1) Ummat ad-Da'wa--the nation that was called upon to
believe in Allah Ta'ala and the Last Day, and 2) Ummat al-Isteajaba--the nation that responded to the call of
Muhammad. Another name for this Ummah is Al-Ummat al-Islamiah (the Islamic Nation). Allah
Subhana wa Ta'ala
commanded the Ummat al-Isteajaba to hold together and not to disagree. The Last Day is where
the apocalyptic teaching in Islam enters.
all Muslims are required to look to Muhammad for guidance in establishing the "Islamic
kingdom of God on earth," it is important for us to review the first constitution that he wrote
in 622 C.E. In 2005 we were in the process of developing the constitutions for
Iraq and Afghanistan. Major issues in developing these constitutions related to
the role of the Shariah in establishing the law of the countries. The future of these countries
depends on the role of Shariah. This is a critical time for the future of the world. The
first Islamic state in Medina established the Medina Charter. Based on a social
contract, it was constitutional in character. Today, Islamists are proposing
that the world accept the principles of that contract to emulate Muhammad,
based on the principles set forth in the Qur'an.
acquiesce to the demands of the Islamists, it is imperative that we explore
this contract and its implications.
constitution or Charter of Medina (Dustur al-Madinah) that Muhammad wrote, we read:
A believer shall not slay a believer for the sake of an unbeliever, nor
shall he aid an unbeliever against a believer...Believers are friends one to
the other to the exclusion of outsiders...The believers must avenge the blood
of one another shed in the way of God. (Article 14)
constitution led to death of many Jews and Christians. Is that the direction in
which we want to proceed now?
is important to understand the importance of the events of 1924 and immediately
caliphs were "the Commanders of the Faithful" and the heirs of Muhammad who
ruled the Dar al-Islam from the time of Muhammad's death until the
fall of the Ottoman Empire. Who should be the caliph is the greatest dividing
issue in Islam--the defining criteria of Sunnis and Shiites. This is the battle
we witnessing today in Iraq between the Shiites and the Sunnis. It is also the
battle we are witnessing playing out in Lebanon with Hezbollah. In my article "Iran Reaches the Mediterranean", I comment that it is important to
follow the events in Palestine, Lebanon and Egypt. The election in the
Palestine Authority has resulted in the election of Hamas. In December 2005,
the Egyptian electorate came out strongly for the Muslim Brotherhood, and not
for the liberal elements. In Iraq, the post-Saddam electorate voted in a
pro-Iranian Islamist as prime minister. In Lebanon, the voters celebrated the
withdrawal of Syrian troops by voting Hezbollah into the government. Likewise,
radical Islamic elements have prospered in elections in Saudi Arabia and
the apocalyptic nature surrounding the pronouncements needs to be understood.
Similarly, Westerners need to understand the role of Islamic apocalyptic
teaching to comprehend the actions of the Islamists.
of the Caliphate in 1924 may be the single most epochal event in modern Islam.
Many Islamic fundamentalist groups--including al-Qaeda--have taken it
as their goal to establish a new Caliphate. What would be the implications of
such an event? And just who might this new caliph be?
Bush is correct in his assessment:
"The Shia and Sunni extremists represent different faces of
the same threat. They draw inspiration from different sources, but both seek to
impose a dark vision of violent Islamic radicalism across the Middle East. They
oppose the advance of freedom, and they want to gain control of weapons of mass
destruction. If they succeed in undermining fragile democracies, like Iraq, and
drive the forces of freedom out of the region, they will have an open field to
pursue their dangerous goals. Each strain of violent Islamic radicalism would
world – the media and the administration focus their attention on the "War
on Terror", al
Qaeda and its poster boy Osama bin Laden, they do not understand the role that
the Muslim Brotherhood played and is currently playing in the struggle to build
the Islamic kingdom of God on Earth. Members and na‘ve fellow travelers of the Muslim
Brotherhood and its offshoots, most of which do not subscribe to physical
terrorist actions play a significant role with their positions of influence in
the media, banking, legal, education, religion, politics and even major
corporations. Muslim Brotherhood organizations span the globe and are present
on many university campuses. Their goal is the same--to create a global
totalitarian government operating under Shariah law. They are a no less a potent
factor than the terrorists striking the world's infrastructure.
Leftist/Marxist – Islamist Alliance, of which the Muslim Brotherhood
plays a role, makes up a key element of the Islamic Military Industrial
intellectual father of all modern-day Muslim radicals, the Egyptian Hasan
al-Banna (1906-1949), decried the end of the caliphate because it separated
"the state from religion in a country which was until recently the site of the Commander
of the Faithful."
Al-Banna characterized the end of the caliphate as part of a larger "Western
invasion which was armed and equipped with all the destructive influences of
money, wealth, prestige, ostentation, power and means of propaganda." Al-Banna
founded the first modern radical Muslim organization, the Muslim Brotherhood. The first Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928.
for the International Assessment and Strategy Center, on April 18, 2006,
Douglas Farah in the article The Little Explored Offshore Empire of the
International Muslim Brotherhood commented:
Brotherhood has played a central role in providing both the ideological and
technical capacities for supporting terrorist finance on a global basis the
Brotherhood has spread both the ideology of militant pan-Islamicism and became
the spine upon which the funding operations for militant pan-Islamicism was
built, taking funds largely generated from wealthy Gulf state elites and
distributing them for terrorist education, recruitment and operations
widelydispersed throughout the world, especially in areas where Muslims
hoped to displace non-Muslim or secular governments."
every major Islamist group can trace its roots to the Muslim Brotherhood,
founded in 1928 by the Hassan al-Banna, a pan-Islamicist who opposed the
secular tendencies in Islamic nations. Hamas is a direct offshoot of the
Brotherhood. Hassan al-Turabi, who offered sanctuary in Sudan to Osama bin
Laden and his al Qaeda allies, is a leader of the Brotherhood. He also sat on
the boards of several of the most important Islamic financial institutions ""
article by Mohamad Bazzi writing for Newsday on October 10, 2001, he wrote: "By
launching a "holy war" against the United States, Osama bin Laden would like a return to the
glory days of the Muslim empire."
videotaped statement broadcast around the world Sunday, bin Laden said the
United States was finally tasting the kind of "humiliation and disgrace" that
the Muslim community has felt "for more than 80 years."
say that by using such an exact figure, bin Laden was most likely referring to
the end of the Caliphate, the religious and government authority that ruled the
Muslim empire from the death of the Prophet Muhammad in 632 until 1924. The
Caliphate has been an important symbol for many Islamic militants who want to
replace secular governments or monarchies with states ruled by Islamic law."
Laden, the end of the Caliphate symbolizes a point at which the Islamic ummah,
or community, became divided into nation-states. In its wake, a sense of
worldwide Muslim unity gave way to Arab, Turkish and Persian nationalism. The
Turkish nationalist Kemal Ataturk abolished the Caliphate."
Laden and other Islamists see the demise of the Caliphate as paving the way for
the downturn in the Islamic community and its subjection by western colonial
powers," said Diaa Rashwan, a leading expert on Islamic militants and a senior
researcher at the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo.
"In the Islamists' eyes, it was the moment when the ills of colonialism and
nationalism joined together."
Bush is correct in his assessment of the use of the Internet and the recruiting
"Al Qaeda continues to adapt in the face of our global
campaign against them. Increasingly, al Qaeda is taking advantage of the
Internet to disseminate propaganda, and to conduct "virtual recruitment" and
"virtual training" of new terrorists. Al Qaeda's leaders no longer need to meet
face-to-face with their operatives. They can find new suicide bombers, and
facilitate new terrorist attacks, without ever laying eyes on those they're
training, financing, or sending to strike us."
article Axis of Appeasement – The Inconvenient Truth I addressed the approach being used
by the Islamists: According to Susanne Koelbl writing on August 17 in Spiegel Online: Terrorists are becoming
increasingly adept at producing high-quality videos. DVDs depicting bloody
beheadings are now available at markets in Pakistan and Afghanistan. They're
also on the Web.
Internet has become a communication platform for terrorists--as well as
for their supporters and their adversaries--is nothing new. These days,
though, a close monitoring of the Web reveals the increasing brutality of the
international jihadist movement. The radicals' isolation and desperation is
also on full display. The images, though, also document the vulnerability of
Western armies in the remote mountainous regions of Afghanistan and Iraq,
together with the challenges they face in dealing with the realities of the
countries in which they operate.
services believe that the Pakistani city of Quetta is home to what is probably
the most professional media workshop of terror. The city, in the state of
Beluchistan in the Pashtun border region, is considered a Taliban stronghold.
And it plays host to al-Qaeda's propaganda headquarters, the "Foundation for
Islamic Media Production," or "Al-Sahab."
important statements issued by the godfather of terror Osama bin Laden, his
deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, the head of al- Qaeda's
Iraq division until he was killed in June, were edited and processed here. What
began as an amateur operation producing poor-quality videos has since turned
into a highly professional outfit.
February 2005, Jane's Defense Weekly wrote with concern about what it called "significant
developments" in the composition of jihadist terror cells, including "an
increase in the number of members who have 'joined' and were no longer
pamphlet circulating on Islamist Web sites at about the same time, titled "How
can I become a member of al- Qaeda?" seems to confirm that the path to al-Qaeda & Co. is
growing ever shorter. The pamphlet's response to its own question, according to
a translation provided by the Washington based institute SITE, is as follows:
is no longer merely an organization fighting Jews and crusaders alone. Today
the al-Qaeda issues an 'invitation' that asks all Muslims to rise up in support
of God's religion. ... Whoever answers this call is seen as part of al-Qaeda,
whether or not you wish this to happen. But if you are a true Muslim, you have
no other choice but to heed this call."
this approach, al-Qaeda is attracting instant mujahedeen who like the London
bus and subway bombers, essentially recruit themselves within a breathtakingly
short amount of time. As a result, they are far more unpredictable and
difficult to recognize than Afghanistan veterans."
background for President Bush's speech In Their Own Words: What the Terrorists Believe, What
They Hope to Accomplish, and How They Intend to Accomplish It, reference is made to comments by Ayman al-Zawahiri: We Must "Establish An Islamic
Authority " Over As Much Territory As You Can To Spread Its Power In Iraq "
[And] Extend The Jihad Wave To The Secular Countries Neighboring Iraq." We note the strategy for extending
the caliphate from Iraq to neighboring countries. The strategy comes in direct
conflict with emerging Shiite Crescent--thus the battle for control of Iraq.
speech President Bush Discusses Progress in the Global War
on Terror on September 7 he
This coalition includes two nations that used to sponsor terror, but now
help us fight it -- the democratic nations of Afghanistan and Iraq. (Applause.)
In Afghanistan, President Karzai's elected government is fighting our common
enemies. In showing the courage he's showing, he's inspired millions across the
region. In Iraq, Prime Minister Maliki's unity government is fighting al Qaeda
and the enemies of Iraq's democracy. They're taking increasing responsibility
for the security of their free country.
The fighting in Iraq has been difficult and it has been bloody, and some
say that Iraq is a diversion from the war on terror. The terrorists disagree.
Osama bin Laden has proclaimed that the "third world war is raging" in Iraq. Al
Qaeda leaders have declared that Baghdad will be the capital of the new
caliphate that they wish to establish across the broader Middle East. It's hard
to believe that extremists would make large journeys across dangerous borders
to endure heavy fighting, and to blow themselves up on the streets of Baghdad
for a so-called "diversion." The terrorists know that the outcome in the war on
terror will depend on the outcome in Iraq -- and so to protect our own
citizens, the free world must succeed in Iraq.
Baghdad on September 7, 2006, a Draft bill presented to Iraqi parliament on federal
system for Shia, Sunni population as reported by the Islamic Republic
News Service. "Iraqi
parliament's largest Shia party on Thursday put forward a draft bill to
establish federal system of government for both the Shia and Sunni population."
draft bill, read out in parliament, calls for setting up a separate autonomous
states in Iraq for both the Shia and Sunni population."
legislation and a referendum would be needed to establish federalism throughout
the country which would entail creating an autonomous Shia government in the
event followed the report on September 5 also from the
Islamic Republic News Service: Senior Iraqi delegation heads for Tehran "A high-ranking Iraqi delegation
headed by Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs Berham Salih left here for
Tehran Tuesday" "The visit is aimed at enhancing and consolidating relations between
the two countries, the source further stated."
of the legislation is altering the structure of the Iraqi state. The move shows
Iran has found a way around its Shiite allies' inability to dominate Baghdad.
Even so, a number of domestic and international factors mean Iran is not
interested seeing the Iraqi state collapse.
rearranging the provinces into autonomous federal zones along the lines of
Iraq's northern Kurdistan region, the pro-Iranian Shia have found a way to
consolidate their gains over power and the oil resources in the south.
According to an article in Reuters
on September 7, 2006 "Sunnis fear could break up the country and leave them
with little access to its oil wealth."
concentrated in Iraq's resource-poor central and western provinces, are opposed
to such a move, fearing it would seal their political doom by giving Shiites in
the south and Kurds in the north control of much of Iraq's oil.
such as the Iraqi Shiite move for federalism have made Iran's position in Iraq
much clearer: Tehran is going for the gold, and it will not settle for an Iraq
in which Iran's allies are merely the largest political group in a coalition
government. Moving toward a federalist model at a time when the United States
and Israel are not in a position to do much about its regional ambitions would allow
Tehran to reap the benefits it craves in Iraq, but potential pitfalls remain."
Forecasting, Inc. commented on the events on September 6, 2006: "Negotiations
over the proposed autonomy plan thus could put Iraq's future at risk and could
be detrimental to Iran's security. Iran is playing a very dangerous game, one
in which success could mean strategic influence in Iraq, while failure could
mean regional war."
Hall, senior Washington correspondent of Media General News Service commented
in the article Shiite Crescent
arrives: "From the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean, the Shiite Crescent
was jumping last week. Triumphant anti-Israel leaders of Hezbollah in southern
Lebanon, Iran's chest-thumping president, and the made-in-the-USA power
structure of democratic Iraq were crowing that Israel had been beaten."
Abdullah of Jordan, a staunch U.S. ally in the region, saw it coming two years
ago and coined the phrase "Shiite Crescent." His warning was largely directed at
Sunni Muslim nations facing Iran, and his message didn't get much attention
here. But the pieces of the young leader's prophecy are starting to drop into
vision was the emergence of a new power center that would come to dominate the
region. The Shiite Crescent comprised Iran's Shiite-dominated government, the new
Shiite regime taking control after the ouster of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the
Hezbollah-dominated Shiite "state within a state" in southern Lebanon."
cease-fire just declared following Hezbollah's brief war with Israel left
southern Lebanon in ruins and destroyed much of Hezbollah's arms cache. But
Hezbollah's leadership remains strong. And most Shiite Muslims, as well as the
rest of the Arab world, are celebrating what they call a victory over Israel's
much more powerful and modern army and air force."
deep pockets could re supply Hezbollah with arms to keep attacking Israel
unless a U.N. force being formed to move into southern Lebanon is more
aggressive than others have been to stop the traffic through Syria."
is vowing to resist any effort to disarm it."
reported by Reuters on September 7, 2006 Al
Jazeera airs audio of new Iraq al Qaeda leader: "Al Qaeda's new leader
called on Muslims to unify ranks with insurgents in Iraq, according to an audio
tape aired by Al Jazeera television on Thursday."
your hands in our hands ... our enemy has unified his ranks, now is the time to
unite," said the speaker, identified by Al Jazeera as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir.
important to review briefly the history of the rivalry between the Shiites and
the Sunni to understand the complexity of battles raging in Iraq. The
Shiite-Sunni divide starts with early Islamic history with the killing of
Hussain ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib, the third Imam and grandson of the Prophet
Muhammad at the Battle of Karbala in 680. For further study see: The Clash of Ideologies: The Making of the Christian and Islamic
anniversary of his death is called Ashoura, a day of mourning and religious
observance for Shiite Muslims with some flagellating themselves. Shiites
consider Hussain as the rightful successor of the Prophet Muhammad and his
death and commemoration is considered as a struggle against oppression. An
excellent source for further study is: God's
Rule - Government and Islam: Six Centuries of Medieval Islamic Political
the dispute over succession in the seventh century and this death that ignited
the chasm between the Sunni branch of Islam and the Shiites. The conflicts
continued with the coming to power of the Umayyads [the first Islamic dynasty
(661-750)] and the Abbasids [second of two great dynasties (750-1258) who came
to power under the auspices of a Shiite movement].
the Shiites lost the battle for the political leadership of the Muslim world
and became a dissident community. Two major empires replaced the Islamic
caliphate; the Safavids in Iran who were Shiite [came to power in 1501] and the
Ottomans in Turkey that controlled the Arab world and were Sunni. The
Ottoma-Safavid rivalry became a surrogate for the Shiite-Sunni rivalry and the
Ottomans lasted far longer. The Ottoman caliphate lasted until 1924.
World War I the Arab world rose to significance, the structure of power
confirms the Sunni domination particularly in places like Bahrain, and Iraq,
where the Shiite were the majority but the British gave the power to the Sunni
ruling dynasty. The British policy confirmed sectarian attitudes and Arab
nationalism was secular on the surface but it was sometimes clearly anti-Shiite.
The book Desert
Queen: The Extraordinary Life of Gertrude Bell: Adventurer, Adviser to Kings,
Ally of Lawrence of Arabia by Janet Wallach provides an interesting insight
into the events leading up to establishment of the boundaries of Iraq and the
important role of oil from Iran had following WW 1.
Iran has the most powerful military force in the Gulf, independent of its
potential for nuclear armaments, except for the U.S. At present most of
countries in the Gulf are governed by Sunnis where in some cases the Shia are
persecuted. The Shia of Iraq now pretty much run that country for the first
time–even though they were a majority population since they converted to
Shiism to counter the what they saw as the brutalities and oppression of the
Ottoman Empire (caliphate) a long time ago. Following the recent war, the Shia
in Lebanon want even more political representation. The same could be said for
the Shia of Saudi Arabia (who live in the area that has the major oil fields in
the northeast), the Shia of Bahrain (a majority of the population), and the
Shia are also found in Kuwait, Qatar, Pakistan and elsewhere. While the Shia
are only 15 percent of the total population of Muslims in the world, they are
on the ascendance due in large part to the change in power in Iraq. The regimes
in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and elsewhere are also under considerable heat.
The success of Hezbollah in standing up to Israel in Lebanon has increased the
temperature for their leaders, and in their streets. Also, the probability of a
Hezbollah attack on U.S. interests was not particularly high before these
events, it has been suggested that it is much higher now. It has been a long
time since Hezbollah targeted the U.S. Now all bets may be off. It was
Hezbollah that was behind the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in
Beirut that killed 241 Americans.
be an element of truth in the fact that the Shiites are looking to Tehran for
guidance and leadership. It is not only a question of allegiance as much as it
is of turning to an external political reference. It is also no longer a
question of Shiites alone looking to Iran. Sunni and Christian Arabs are also gazing
in that direction, on the whole, because they see an Iran that is assertive,
that is strong and defiant of a world superpower and the West.
eyes of many Muslims and even non-Muslims, Iran is becoming the defender of the
Arab cause and against the hegemony of the U.S. A lot of the Arabs look at Iran
as more powerful and the Shiites even more. With a moral-deficit in the West,
subscribing to the Judeo-Christian has no importance. Power and money take
precedence. Iran is respected, Iran stands up to the West and they admire that
stance. There does not seem to any leader of Sunni cause. The West only sees
Osama bin Laden as representing the Sunni cause. These are the days of the
Shiite rise to power. The balance of power may have been altered in the Muslim
were to be divided up, or for that matter the Bill presented to Parliament on
September 7 were to pass, the southern region would become Shiite--and the
Iranians would dominate southern Iraq. This not only would give them control of
the Basra oil fields, but also would theoretically open the road to Kuwait and
Saudi Arabia. From a strictly military point of view, and not including the
Shiite insurgencies at all, Iran could move far down the western side of the
Gulf without the presence of American forces. This would lead a possibility
that the Iranians could seize control of the bulk of the entire region's oil
reserves and control of the Straits of Hormuz. They could do the same thing if
Iraq were to be united as an Iranian satellite, but that would be far more
difficult to achieve and would require active U.S. cooperation in withdrawing.
The Shiites chose the route to take the southern provinces, with the hope that
the U.S. would not object to strongly.
accomplish their goal, the Iranians will utilize the propaganda machine
adequately supported by Leftist/Marxist – Islamist Alliance to push for
withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The Iranians are counting on the continuing
violence to cause discontent with the situation in Iraq. The propaganda tool is
to create a wedge between the American people and the government. This is
obviously happening in the media. Ultimately, they are counting on the
Americans to be sufficiently exhausted by their experience of Iraq to
rationalize their withdrawal – leaving, as in Vietnam, a graceful
interval for what follows.
options for solving the issues arising in Iraq are not good. The Iranian
hegemony over the Gulf and the Shiite Crescent would change the world balance of
power. While U.S. and the West are focused on Osama bin Laden and the battles
for withdrawal from Iraq, the Islamists are marching on and gaining political,
legal, media propaganda and economic strength throughout the western world.
battle for control of the crescent could be a defining moment in the rebuilding
of the caliphate. The events occurring in this region could escalate out of
control. It must be remembered that Iran is the key player in the Shiite
Crescent. Iran is an observer and shortly will
become a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) joining with
Russia and China. Also, it is important not to forget that Venezuela is
friendly both with Iran and other members of the SCO. As noted above the
Eastern Province in Saudi Arabia (oil producing region) is dominated by
Shiites. On September 7, The United States formally handed over control of
Iraq's new military to Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's Shiite government on
Thursday just as rebels unleashed a fresh wave of deadly bomb attacks on Iraqi
security forces. In spite of events occurring with coalescing of the Shiite
Washington has hailed the handover as a "gigantic" milestone toward withdrawing
155,000 U.S.-led foreign troops from Iraq.
powers -- the Shiites and Sunni are battling for control and attempting to
establish the Islamic kingdom of God on Earth. Mahmood Ahmadinezhad
has as his stated goal of causing events to occur that will bring
about the apocalyptic end of the world. We must listen to what these leaders
are saying. Each is attempting to establish the new caliphate.
lifeblood of the forces seeking to establish the Islamic kingdom of God on
Earth is money. The
West has done a fair job in identifying some of sources of funding for terror
coming from non-profit organizations and the banking system. The removal of
this funding, all be it critical, has not reduced the major flow of funding to
the countries, which have the desire to remove the hegemony of the West and in
particular, the U.S. The funding results largely from the need for oil from
these countries--energy interdependence and need for these foreign
governments to finance the budget and foreign trade deficits of the U.S.
nothing unites the parties more than the common goal of establishing a
totalitarian one-world government that can bring down the West. This is what we
are witnessing in the Leftist/Marxist – Islamist Alliance. This may be
what President Bush referred to in his comment:
"Secondly, along with this campaign of terror, the enemy has
a propaganda strategy. Osama bin Laden laid out this strategy in a letter to
the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, that coalition forces uncovered in Afghanistan
in 2002. In it, bin Laden says that al Qaeda intends to "[launch]," in his
words, "a media campaign " to create a wedge between the American people and
their government." This media campaign, bin Laden says, will send the American
people a number of messages, including "that their government [will] bring them
more losses, in finances and casualties." And he goes on to say that "they are
being sacrificed " to serve " the big investors, especially the Jews." Bin Laden
says that by delivering these messages, al Qaeda "aims at creating pressure
from the American people on the American government to stop their campaign
presented in a Financial Times Article US
plays down al-Qaeda in list of terror threats by Caroline Daniel and Edward
Alden in Washington: "The Bush administration yesterday defended its record in
combating terrorism, and identified the principal terrorist threat facing the
US as a "transnational movement of extremist organisations" that exploit Islam,
rather than the al-Qaeda group."
White House report, "Combating Terrorism", was an updated version of a 2003
strategy report. It made no mention of Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader,
and said the US had made "substantial progress in degrading the al-Qaeda
network, killing or capturing key lieutenants, eliminating safe havens and
disrupting existing lines of support".
White House report was countered by an analysis from the Third Way, a think-tank,
launched with senior Democrats, which looked at Mr Bush's national security
record. "We set out to measure whether President Bush is making America safer.
And the answer is no, based on our analysis."
the course against President Bush and the "War on Terror" Reuters reported in the
rejects "war on terror", "Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin,
speaking in parliament, expressed these views on global terrorism, while
President Jacques Chirac backed France's claims to the international front rank
with a fresh defense of his country's nuclear arsenal."
noted Chirac's strong opposition to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and
said the Arab state had now sunk into violence and was feeding new regional
not forget that these crises play into the hands of all extremists," the prime
minister said in a debate on the Middle East. "We can see this with terrorism,
whether it tries to strike inside or outside our frontiers," he added.
terrorism, what's needed is not a war. It is, as France has done for many
years, a determined fight based on vigilance at all times and effective
cooperation with our partners."
will only end this curse if we also fight against injustice, violence and these
crises," he said.
The Axis of
Appeasement has made its position clear for the progressives of the "The
third Way." In an
article on Hillary
Rodham Clinton published on the discoverthenetwork.com September 6, 2006 written
by David Horowitz and published by FrontPageMagazine.com
on June 22, 2000, quoted below:
Third Way" is a
familiar term from the lexicon of the left with a long and dishonorable
pedigree in the catastrophes created by messianic socialists in the 20th
Century. It is the most ornate panel in the tapestry of deception I described
at the beginning of this essay.
1930s, Nazis used "The Third Way" to characterize their own brand of national socialism as a
equidistant between the "internationalist" socialism of the Soviet Union and
the capitalism of the West. Trotskyists used "The Third Way" as a term to distinguish their own
Marxism from Stalinism and capitalism. In the 1960s, New Leftists used "The
Third Way" to
define their politics as an independent socialism between the Soviet gulag and
the history of Nazism, Trotskyism and the New Left have shown, there is no "Third
Way." There is the
capitalist, democratic way based on private property and individual
rights--a way that leads to liberty and universal opportunity. And there
is the socialist way of group identities, group rights, a relentless expansion
of the political state, restricted liberty and diminished opportunity. The Third
Way is not a path
to the future. It is just the suspension between these two destinations. It is
a bad faith attempt on the part of people who are incapable of giving up their
socialist schemes to escape the taint of their discredited past.
totalitarian temptation remains powerfully in place. Muslims across the world
are drawn by the apocalyptic teachings of Islam with its slogan "Islam is
the solution." That
was the case from Iran in 1979 to Algeria in 1992 to Turkey in 2002, to the
Paris riots in 2005 to the actions of the Hezbollah and Hamas in recent weeks. Under
Secretary Levey discussed Hezbollah's and Iran's financial institutions on
September 8, 2006 at a
9/11-related event in Washington. "It is remarkable that Iran has a
nine-digit line item in its budget to support Hizballah, Hamas, and other
terrorist organizations at the expense of investing in the future of its young
people." He went on to comment: "While we can point to progress since 2001,
there is no doubt that the world remains a dangerous place." Continuing: "The
next steps may involve sacrifice, but I think that people are beginning to
recognize that the costs we face now pale in comparison to those we might face
in the future if Iran does not change course."