Replies

Good morning all.

Speaking of Clinton and his whereabouts>

From Jihadunspun:

Feb 21, 2004

By Yamin Zakaria

There is no divine text or universally recognized document that defines the precise notion of democracy. The West generally trumpets that it is its only adherents, and claims to personify the notion. In addition, any state looking for recognition as a democracy usually seeks the seal of approval of the West and so it is only rational to acknowledge the West as the main proprietor and arbiter of this issue. The US, being the leader of the Western world can be regarded as democracy’s high priest. Consequently, the words and deeds of the US and other members of the Western bloc with respect to democracy need to be assessed in order to obtain clarity on the matter.

As high priest, the US spearheaded war in its name by attacking Iraq even before seeking the approval of the Iraqi population. Pity, such ‘noble’ wars were not waged to liberate the apartheid South Africa, genocidal Australia, Nazi-like segregated ‘holy’ Israel (occupied Palestine), the ‘Republic’ of Saudi Arabia, the oil field ‘states’ of Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, etc. Isn’t there an axiom, which states that consistency in applying a certain standard is evidence of honesty and the absence of which implies hypocrisy?

Despite differences in the details of democracy, there is an overwhelming consensus in one of its central feature and that is that its people are sovereign. Consequently, they have the right to decide who they elect and how they choose to be governed. This may also represents an inherent contradiction, as sovereign people may choose to live by a non-democratic system and bury democracy, as the Algerians were poised to do sometime ago. However, under such circumstances, the high priest US is sure to unleash its military forces and shove democracy down your throat. So, remember it is ‘democracy’ defined by the US, not democracy defined by the ordinary masses that brings freedom. In fact, you are not free until you accept the US version of how things should be or “the American dream”, even though it may be a nightmare for the rest!

On the basis of enforcing democracy through the US military machine, many of the not-so-war-enthusiastic were persuaded to support the aggression sanitized by the media. In the post Saddam/Bathist era, it is Viceroy Paul Bremer that is dictating to the Iraqis how they should govern themselves. As it turns out, this can be almost anything except Islam, “as long as the US interests (including Israel’s ‘defense’) and values are supported”. So if the Iraqi Governing Council were to legitimize homosexual marriages in the sprit of democracy, as has been done recently in the US, Bremer would certainly approve. No pun intended about Bremer’s sexuality, even though this has become a fad in many Western societies. We even have an obscure Lesbian advocating the reformation of Islam, no surprise that the mass media is providing the full publicity.

Bremer arrogantly boasts that nothing will come into existence as law, without his approval. Who has already put Iraq on sale without any authorization from Iraqi’s? Even the worst Arab dictator with a degree of sanity would not have done that, excluding “the clown” of Libya. All this really shows is that the US intention of ‘democracy’ in Iraq is American rule of Iraq by the hand picked token Arabs/Muslims that support corporate America and defend Israel.

Another inherent contradiction within “democracy” is the fact it serves well those who can manipulate the system in their favour. This is natural as any given society is not homogenous, and most certainly a system operating on the basis of freedom will inevitably lead to the stronger members dominating over the weak. Observe the current election circus in the United States, where only the rich and powerful are able to participate. Conversely, without their approval no party or an individual can acquire power, even if they managed to acquire popularity among the masses.

There is nothing intrinsic within democracy that dictates that the particular government that is selected represents the ideal form of democracy, since the defining criteria is that the masses exercise their free will to select the government. Therefore, an Islamic party elected to implement Islamic law is just as democratic as the government chosen by the Americans. Even Adolf Hitler came to power through the democratic system in Germany, unlike Bush, the current leader of the democratic block who came to power illegitimately. Overall this is a small difference as both have a lot in common.

Adolf Hitler claimed to have launched a ‘defensive’ war against the Jews, Slavs and the rest of Europe to protect the German race. Similarly Bush has waged the same ‘defensive’ war against the Islamic world and anyone else that does not to conform to the US dictates. How is it that all the US ‘defensive’ wars were and is fought outside its own borders in distant lands! Hitler claimed the supremacy of the Aryan race, Bush calls for the supremacy of US democracy run by its Multinationals, as exemplified by Paul Bremer of Iraq with the likes of Halliburton and Bechtel.

Hitler had the Gestapo; Bush has the FBI and CIA, who are far more efficient in killing, kidnapping, torture and now arbitrary imprisonment without charge or legal representation. Therefore, like ‘US democracy’, we now have the much lectured, ‘US human rights’, displayed as inhuman behavior. As examples of efficiency, the gas chambers in the good old days were cumbersome and expensive to maintain. So the ‘peace loving’ US invented nuking civilian cities. Now, is that not the mother of all terrorism? Isn’t it the action of a bloodthirsty subhuman regime?

Lets not forget Hitler’s allies like Mussolini who also ‘defended’ itself against the Ethiopian ‘threat’. Wild men on horses with spears and swords charging a battalion equipped with cannons, machine guns and high explosives! Thus in the same light, neo-Mussolini Berlusconi, Spanish inquisitor Aznar and the war criminal Winston Blair came to ‘defend’ Bush against the Iraqi ‘threat’. Blair of course led the way as the British elites have the best track record in gassing the Iraqis, a tradition that was started in the 1930s, well before Saddam.

Since the marketing of US democracy did not go very well, now the plan is to enforce it through undemocratic means. Isn’t that like establishing justice through injustice? Which Donald Rumsfeld also indicated earlier, when the Shia’s were demanding an Islamic government? Just to digress a little, why did they bother with that slogan, instead they should have just looked across the border to Iran. Furthermore, their ‘infallible’ leaders at home are announcing the US as “guests” one day and “the great Satan” next day, whilst the US is engaged in killing Shia’s and Sunnis alike. These Imams, with their black turbans, bushy beards, years of dedicated scholarly study could not legitimately declare Jihad. Or has Jihad now conveniently transformed into struggle against ones carnal desires? Similarly the Fatwa enthusiasts of the region have gone quiet.

The US and the rest of the free world resort to dumping, when there is an excess surplus failing to sell the goods. Those are then fed to the poorer nations. In the same light they make an attempt to dump all the waste products of the Western world onto the Arab/Islamic and other third World countries. One day the West may even attempt to sell their excrements (repackaged of course) and there would be no shortage of enthusiasts, coupled with the off the shelf ‘Islamic verdicts’ and the expected support from the moderate camp. It is not difficult to make such prediction, even after undertaking a cursory observation.

Similarly the sale of democracy has been falling at home over the years. There is greater political apathy emanating from their population. Millions of people who demonstrated recently are beginning to realize the illusion of democracy as being representative of the ordinary masses. So, the US has begun to dump US democracy abroad, particularly focusing on the Islamic world. To aid them in this mission, the US has either manufactured and/or recruited suitable coolies.

There are ‘Arabs’ and ‘Muslims’ campaigning and raising funds along with the Zionist camp to re-elect Bush. They are staunch supporter of US democracy and a believer in Adolf Bush. They don’t waste time in attempting to reconcile the recent statements and actions of the US administration with their promise of democracy, nor do they examine the US track record for establishing it around the world.

Modern day coolies are ‘intellectual’, not physical laborers, like those that built the trans-continental railway. They are ‘educated’ and ‘enlightened’ with lots of titles after their names, their sole purpose is to serve their masters, wittingly or unwittingly. They can have fellowship to Universities like Harvard or Yale, their articles frequently appearing in national newspapers as experts, some are even promoted to become editor of reputable magazines e.g. Newsweek. One day, we may even see one of these coolies as the US secretary of State. That would make it easier for the Arab regimes to officially relinquish further territories and assets for the future US military campaigns, after all it would not be very Arab if they were publicly seen to be doing the same with a Jew like Friedman.

How do these coolies fight their inner conscience if they have one? It is easy - terms like wisdom, practical and working to influence the government by eagerly attending the annual Ramadan party at the embassies. One can even get an Islamic edict by asking Islamic ‘Scholars’ like Zaki Badawi, as he was dining with Bush during his visit to the UK. Never mind the blood of 40,000 innocent civilians or the mythical WMDs, or the destruction and violence inflicted upon Iraq, one can always blame it on Saddam.

Now we have these self-proclaimed leaders appointed by the US. Take Hoshyar Zebari as an example, who is parading himself as the foreign minister of Iraq. You won’t find him walking down any of the towns in Iraq, with his supporters cheering for him. Now the whole world including the US has acknowledged that there were no WMD in Iraq, he seems to ‘think’ otherwise but yet the real experts in the field like David Kay and Hans Blix are not convinced. Expertise and sound opinion based on evidence is not the mark of a coolie - docile obedience and support of the paymaster is.

The final category of these coolies is the so-called leaders of sovereign Muslim states. Consider the recent babble by George Bush to build a ‘peaceful’ world by asserting that Iraq’s mythical WMDs, Libya’s imaginary WMDs, Iran’s non-existent WMDs, and eventually Pakistan’s virtual WMDs now most likely held by the CIA has to be disposed even though others have ownership of such weapons in far greater quantity. This would only increase the relative power of US compared to the Islamic world even further. Despite such honesty from Bush, these leaders are lining up to signup to the above US declaration, yet simultaneously claiming to build ‘independent’, ‘strong’, and ‘sovereign’ states.

Part and parcel of promoting democracy is the familiar notion of ‘protecting’ the women of Iraq from Islam. Examine Bill Clinton’s recent speech in Saudi Arabia lecturing the women how to liberate themselves. Was he thinking of the liberated Monica Lewinsky? Whatever the case, unfortunately (or fortunately) none of the Saudi women at the meeting took up the offer to convert immediately. Western women may consider themselves to be liberated on their knees serving men but such activities are not even found amongst the animal species. Similarly, the French must have been influenced into banning the Islamic veil by the likes of Bridget Bardot. Who, like Clinton is an advocate for women to be serving men on their knees in private or public, then proclaim their ‘liberation’. Why else was the lone Afghan woman paraded semi-nude as a symbol of liberation?

Most of the ‘Scholars’ of Islam ignored the event in the heart of the Islamic world, preferred to concentrate on their usual habit of confining to their caves, engaged in self-purification, as such matters are considered to be religious innovation. Give them a subject like the length of the beard or the length of the trousers and see how much energy they have in debating the matter. In the mean time, the ordinary Muslims are trying to secure food, medicine, education and shelter from the bombs of the US and Israel.

Then comes the fanatical self-purifiers, they are constantly engaging in circular debates with themselves and others. As an example, their favourite subject is to debate abstract theological/philosophical matters. No other issue can be dealt with unless these matters are solved first! So they reason that all difficulties in the Islamic world are due to not addressing these philosophical issues. It would certainly make the American forces tremble in their knees, once these self-purified armies emerge from their caves, palaces and shiny mosques. They then parade their ‘success’ in claiming so many American soldiers were converted to Islam. Thus the logic is, have more military bases, never mind what kind of destruction they are engaged in and to whom, but the potential converts makes the whole military operation worthwhile. It is simply Jihad but operating in reverse gears! So, how can the Arabs/Muslims not progress with such profound thinkers and activists, spending their energies in such ‘fruitful’ activities?

What is the conclusion? US democracy is full of hypocrisy, which many around the world consider common knowledge. Yet, the US is threatening to dump or enforce this waste product on the Arab/Islamic world, in order to conceal their efforts at colonization. Therefore, the real question is to identify their helpers aiding them wittingly or unwittingly. Who are these coolies? How they can be kept at bay? How can this foreign virus of US democracy be contained and eventually terminated before the rest of the human race is choked to death with it?