THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE GREAT CALIPHATE

Insider Report ^ | Larry Abraham

[Luis Gonzalez]

It's not apple and oranges at all. Most people who do not commit crimes are not out there protesting the fact that crimes are committed.

For example, I've never seen millions of Christians take to the streets of America to protest the murder of a million fetuses a year in this country. I've seen hundreds,and even thousands, but I've never seen ten to fifteen million Christians out there protesting. Does that mean that Christians approve of abortion?

Of course it doesn't, it's absurd to think that. Just like it is absurd to comment that simply because millions of Muslims haven't taken to the streets to protest "the Jihad", they in fact support it.

The facts that we are not fighting one billion Muslims, and that we are fighting alongside Muslims to defeat terrorism is irrefutable proof that at least a vast majority of Muslims do not approve of terrorism in the name of Allah. Just like the fact that the majority of American Christians do not have abortions is condemnation if the act.

"When I see muslims reject not only jihad, but islam as well I will embrace them."

So, you are a Jihadist yourself.

Physician, heal thyself.

[DuncanWaring]

It's not a "Clash of Civilizations".

It's a clash of Civilization vs. Barbarism.

[DoctorMichael]

Yet another Bump for a good article.

[KeyLargo]

I guess that we all should started paying attention to the Israel Police warnings to the citizens of Israel. Go to:

Israel Police
http://www.police.gov.il/english/Publications/Terror/xx_terror.asp

[nuconvert]

Thanks for the link. I wonder how effective those are?
Like should we be doing that here in U.S.? Or is the money spent on printing and distribution better spent on another endeavor, I wonder?

[Freebird Forever]

I've never seen millions of Christians take to the streets of America to protest the murder of a million fetuses a year in this country.

To denounce an atrocity and to "take to the streets" are two entirely separate endeavors.

Millions of christians are vocally opposed to abortion. And unfortunately, many "nominal" christians take a position of indifference or tacitly support the pro choice stance.

because millions of Muslims haven't taken to the streets to protest "the Jihad", they in fact support it.

There you go again with this "taking to the streets" crap, as if that were the only method of displaying objection.

The facts that we are not fighting one billion Muslims

Show me a poll of those 1 billion muslims where even a simple majority have unequivocally stated that Israel has a right to exist in peace.

I'll save you the time looking. It'll never happen. Show me a poll of any muslim population anywhere which states this. That will never happen either.

and that we are fighting alongside Muslims to defeat terrorism is irrefutable proof that at least a vast majority of Muslims do not approve of terrorism in the name of Allah.

A fledgling Iraqi defense force of questionable loyalty is irrefutable proof of nothing. For you to derive the conclusion you did from that premise without any other facts in evidence shows that you don't have a clue as to how to construct a logical argument.

"When I see muslims reject not only jihad, but islam as well I will embrace them."

So, you are a Jihadist yourself.

No Louie, just a capitalist.

islam disrupts commerce worldwide. Those directly oppressed by its yoke as well as those of other ideologies / belief systems who suffer from islams' numerous violent jihads would be better off if islam were rejected by each and every one of its' adherents and condemned to the dustbin of history.

I would then gladly embrace all of the freed hostages.

[neverdem]

BTTT

[neverdem]

From time to time, I’ll post or ping on noteworthy articles about politics and foreign and military affairs.

[Zman516]

"I must also fault President Bush and the administration spokesmen for not telling the American people what they really need to know about this “war”. If they don’t do that sometime between now and November it may cost them the election." The administration may talk all they like about this, but if Blather, Jennings and Brokaw don't mention it, most Americans won't hear it. Sadly.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

However, by this time a growing anti-western sentiment, blaming its internal failures on anyone but themselves, was taking hold and setting the stage for a new revival know has Wahhabism which came into full bloom under the House of Saud on the Arabian peninsula shortly before the onset of WWI. It is this Wahhabi version of Islam which has infected the religion itself, now finding adherents in almost all branches and sects, especially the Shiites. What this sect calls for is the complete and total rejection of anything and everything which is not based in the original teachings of The Prophet and it finds its most glaring practice in the policies of the Afgani Taliban or the Shiite practices of the late Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. Its Ali Pasha (Field Marshall) is now known as Osama bin Laden, the leader of the “third Jihad”.

Huh??

Hatred of all things Shi'ite is a basic cornerstone of radical Wahhabism.

---

This is particularly true of the Shi`ite question in Saudi politics. Radical Sunni Islamists hate Shi`ites more than any other group, including Jews and Christians. Al-Qaeda's basic credo minces no words on the subject: "We believe that the Shi`ite heretics are a sect of idolatry and apostasy, and that they are the most evil creatures under the heavens." For its part, the Saudi Wahhabi religious establishment expresses similar views. The fatwas, sermons, and statements of established Saudi clerics uniformly denounce Shi`ite belief and practice. A recent fatwa by Abd al-Rahman al-Barrak, a respected professor at the Imam Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University (which trains official clerics), is a case in point. Asked whether it was permissible for Sunnis to launch a jihad against Shi`ites, al-Barrak answered that if the Shi`ites in a Sunni-dominated country insisted on practicing their religion openly, then yes, the Sunni state had no choice but to wage war on them. Al-Barrak's answer, it is worth noting, assumes that the Shi`ites are not Muslims at all.

This sectarian hatred that the clerics preach bears directly on the United States. Projecting their domestic struggle onto the external world, Saudi hard-liners are now arguing that the Shi`ite minority in Saudi Arabia is conspiring with the United States in its war to destroy Islam. Thus al-Ayyiri, the al-Qaeda propagandist, argued that the Shi`ites have hatched a long-term plot to control the countries of the Persian Gulf. As part of this conspiracy, the Shi`ite minorities in Sunni countries are insinuating themselves into positions of responsibility so as to function as a fifth column for the enemies of true Islam. "The danger of the Shi`ite heretics to the region," he states, "is not less than the danger of the Jews and the Christians."

The Saudi Paradox ~~ Michael Scott Doran, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2004
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040101faessay83105-p40/michael-scott-doran/the-saudi-paradox.html

---

Iraq being a strongly-Shi'te country (60-65% of the population), I expect that the Shi'ites will eventually come to complete power in Iraq following the US withdrawal (and the US must withdraw sooner or later, the occupation is financially and militarily unsustainable in an age of $500 billion dollar deficits).

This will result in a confrontation between the radical Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia (who supplied 15 of the 19 WTC hijackers) and the "Shi'ite Empire" of Iran and Iraq.

I think it's pretty well inevitable, and I say: so be it. Best we should return home, tend to our own business here in the USA, and let the Wahhabis and Shi'ites get back to their preferred mutual occupation -- killing eachother.

Whoever "wins" will still sell us oil, after all -- it's the only thing they have.

IMO as always, OP

[Valin]

When I see muslims reject not only jihad, but islam as well I will embrace them. And not one second before.

And if they don't?

[lainde]

bttt

[maryz]

There never was a "Great Caliphate" though:

I don't see that the article claims that there was; it seems to describe the "Great Caliphate as a goal for the future:

The Third Jihad now had a base of operations and the oil wealth to support its grand design or what they call the “Great Caliphate”. . . What this design calls for is the replacement of all secular leadership in any country with Muslim majorities. This would include, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, all the Emirates, Sudan, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and finally what they call the “occupied territory” Israel.

[Kay Ludlow]

bump for later reading

[Rebelbase]

"If you became a convert, your taxes were immediately eliminated, as was your tithe."

As the Islamic world grew in size the above statement was discontinued. Conquered people realized it was easier to bow and pray five times a day and avoid taxes, so they paid lip service to Islam for that reason. This caused a lack of revenue which IIRC, led to at least one of the many uprisings in Bagdhad (or Damascus?).

[Freebird Forever]

And if they don't?

Why do you feel the need to ask?

[Killing Time]

"It is this Wahhabi version of Islam which has infected the religion itself, now finding adherents in almost all branches and sects, especially the Shiites"

I stopped reading at this point. The author is plainly clueless.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"...the US must withdraw sooner or later..."

Wanna bet?

Germany, Japan, North Korea.

We're still there.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I stopped reading at this point. The author is plainly clueless."

No, it's you that's clueless.

Perhaps if you didn't stop reading once you reached the parts you don't understand, you would stop being clueless.

[BayouCoyote]

BUMP!