FIRE WITH FIRE

It happens, read this article if you don't believe it or think that forced conversions to Islam are a thing of the past only done in the 600 to 1800's.

The link that we mentions references the forced conversion to Islam on video of the two Fox News reporters that were kidnapped just a few weeks ago in the Gaza Strip. Both were forced by threat of death to embrace the Muslim faith on video. Both have recanted now that they have been released.

What kind of a religion forces conversions to their faith at gunpoint? Well unfortunately this is the historical background of how the Muslim empire in the 600 to 1800's has operated. This is nothing new. Unfortunately for these two reporters, their careers in the Middle East are over for as now that they have recanted their conversion, they are really huge targets. They are now believers who have been lead astray and now will need to be severely corrected or eradicated to prevent others of the faith from being contaminated by them.

Historically as Muslims invaded the Middle East and parts of Europe they forced large populations to convert to the Muslim faith to prevent being killed. Many populations and whole towns and villages were simply either slaughtered or forcibly removed and sold in slave markets in Morocco. Forced conversions to the faith are not new to the Muslim faith.

What would you do if you had a gun to your head. Convert or not? If you converted and then the governing Muslim population took your children from you to raise them as faithful Muslims in another city or country what would you do?

Historically some in the populations during the aggressive jihad period did convert to the Muslim faith. Many of these countries are still Muslim today. Just look at Turkey, Yugoslavia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the other "stan" countries in the Balkans. They were all part of the old Muslim conquest and the Muslim Caliphate.

Some of these population refused to convert and were killed. Their children were then still taken either to become slaves, moved into harems of the powerful and elite, boys and girls used as sexual concubines, and the cream of the crop of young men forced into the elite military troop for Caliph. These young men were removed from their countries of origin, trained aggressively in the Muslim faith and militarily, and then forced then to fight their own countrymen on the behalf of the Caliph in their originating countries.

I find the matter of forced conversions a difficult one to address and one that however will not go away by just pretending that it was a fluke or just an aggressive group of captors that did this to the Fox reporters. Forced conversions are part of bringing the external Muslim jihad to the world. Get ready for when you are asked the question as you may be one day, do you convert or not? Do you give your children over or die?

If you want more information on the history of jihad I recommend that you read The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate if the Non-Muslims by Dr. Andrew Bostom. His book will enlighten you on what has happened already and the history that has shaped the Islamic Extremist identity of today.

Posted by The Watcher at Thursday, August 31, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Watcher’s August 30 posting of the interview of Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir perfectly summarizes the mindset of Islamic Extremism and their rationale for murder, destruction, and terrorism.

Let’s look at the history of Cleric Bashir:
(Courtesy CBS News) On June 14, Bashir, 68, walked out of Jakarta's Cipinang prison after serving 26 months for conspiracy in the 2002 Bali bombings that killed 202 people. Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir, is the founder and head of the Pesantren al-Mukmin of Ngruki, based in the Indonesian city of Surakarta, and which has produced nearly all of Southeast Asia's top terrorist suspects. This history, along with his recent interview, convinces me that Bashir is a career criminal, unrepentant, and determined to continue his course of violence and destruction in Indonesia.

First and foremost on my mind is why the authorities in Indonesia would let a person like this out of jail. His very words express support for mass murder and the destruction of people’s lives, property, and prosperity. In addition, he is training those who wish to overthrow society as we know it in exchange for a Taliban-like “utopia” on Earth. In a country where convicted drug traffickers face the death penalty, there is something inherently wrong with permitting a person like Bashir walk free on the streets.

Bashir’s theology is wrong on a number of points. The Prophet Muhammad affirms the authority of God/Allah as written in the scriptures of Moses, the prophets, and the words of Jesus. Therefore, Bashir’s interpretation of the Koran directly conflicts internally as well as externally with the other written instruments of Allah. The Creator of the universe is perfect, does not make mistakes, and does not require correction by man. Therefore, whether Muslims cite the words of the Prophet, or those recorded in the scriptures of the Book (Jews and Christians), the test of the accuracy of their message is whether or not they are consistent with ALL of the words of Allah. Bashir’s message consistently violates the words of Allah.

From the Web, the universal definition of a CULT is: “Any group which has a pyramid type authoritarian leadership structure with all teaching and guidance coming from the person/persons at the top. The group will claim to be the only way to God, Nirvana, Paradise, Ultimate Reality, Full Potential, Way to Happiness etc, and will use thought reform or mind control techniques to gain control and keep their members.” Bashir’s views certainly fall into this category.

So why aren’t we hearing an outcry from the Mullahs and Clerics of the “peaceful” religion of Islam? The religious leaders must demand peace and condemn such words spoken in the name of Allah. Since Bashir’s interview appeared in Al-Jazeera, their journalists would be irresponsible if they did not publish counter viewpoints from the mainstream Muslim clerics. Many of us believe that it was irresponsible to publish such an inflammatory interview in the first place.

Posted by Silver Eagle at Thursday, August 31, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

As I read this article on Aljazeera.net I am steeling myself for more terrorism in Indonesia. I would highly recommend that you read the interview that Al Jazerra posted with Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir, founder and head of the Pesantren al-Mukmin of Ngruki, based in the Indonesian city of Surakarta, is widely known in Southeast Asia and around the world. I think that it will open your eyes.

I have lifted the most important quotes from Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir verbatim. I think that you may find them as troubling as I have.

Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir

"There is not a single Muslim leader today who has the courage and commitment to defend Islam and Muslims, they are all in awe of the United States and other Western powers, and are indebted to them. This is what we call "Wahn". Our Prophet warned that this would be the case in the future, that the Muslim ummat [Muslim family of believers] would be great in numbers, but weak in spirit - until they are trampled upon again and again."

"The Arab leaders and other Muslim leaders in Asia all suffer from this disease called "wahn", this weakness brought about by wealth and privilege, and thus they have become soft. That is why they cannot stand up to the kafirs [non-believers also called infidels] and they cannot be firm in their statements and policies. Their love for the world and all their worldly possesions means that they only think of themselves."

"...the weakness does not come from the millions of Muslims in the world. They do not mind being radical, they have no fear to speak out and to protest and to jihad. But the weakness comes from these Westernised co-opted Muslim leaders who just want to look good in the eyes of the West and Western media."

"Today the Western powers and media want to domesticate us like sheep, to keep us tame and domesticated. But why are animals domesticated? So that they can be slaughtered in the end!"

"The only model to follow is pure Islam. Because Islam in its original form was tough and hard, not weak and pliable. Islam is fixed, stable, ordered and disciplined, and so are Muslims."

"If we return to the real practice of true Islam we would be much stronger and that is when the kafirs will fear us. That is why we need to uphold the Shariah [the legal framework within which public and some private aspects of life are regulated] and return to real Islam. But the West is trying to weaken Islam from outside and inside. They attack our people and invade our countries from outside, and they weaken us from within with ideas like secularism, liberalism and democracy. This is all designed to contaminate our pure Islam."

"Islam is perfect, there is nothing to be added or changed. We have shown that Islam can rule the world perfectly for 14 centuries, and during this time of Muslim power we did not borrow ideas like democracy from others, so why do we need to learn democracy from them now? As long as Muslims were confident they could not be defeated, but now we are just puppets."

"This is why we are calling for the upholding of the Shariah here in Indonesia. We demand an Islamic state, and not some form of Islamisation of society. We want the state to be Islamic, with Islamic leaders who have the courage and will to implement the Shariah in total. There is no other way."

"So we want an Islamic state where Islamic law is not just in the books but enforced, and enforced with determination. There is no space and no room for democratic consultation. The Shariah is set and fixed, so why do we need to discuss it anymore? Just implement it!"

"Indonesians must understand that there is no Islamic state without the enforcement of Islamic laws. Otherwise it is just talk and nothing else."

"As for Malaysia, you may be economically better off but your leaders are weak. Badawi may come from a family of ulama [community of legal Muslim scholars] but his faith is weak and so is his spirit. How can Malaysia sign a free trade agreement with America and Japan? Are these not kafir [non-believing] countries? And America today is an enemy of Muslim states and the supporter of Israel. In Islam that makes America a kafir harbi (enemy) state, and we Muslims are obliged to cut off all ties, diplomatic and economic with such an enemy state."

"Anwar (Ibrahim) is also someone who does not understand Islam well. How can he talk about dialogue with America and the West? What dialogue? With murderers of Muslims? Anwar is mistaken about his views on Westerners and Jews. The Jews are cunning and cannot be trusted, as it states in the Qur'an."

"How can we dialogue for peace in the Arab world as long as Israel exists? Israel cannot dream of having peaceful borders because Israel has no right to exist, no right to be there. That is the land of Palestine, for the Palestinians. How can any Muslim leader say that Israel has the right to safe borders? It should not be there in the first place!"

"In Islam there is only one way, the Islamic way. Dialogue with the kafirs [enemies of the Islamic state and non-believers] is useless unless we Muslims are already living in Islamic states and not secular democracies. When you want dialogue with Muslims, Muslims need to be in power in their own countries first, on their terms. If the (Muslim) government does not impose Shariah, it has to be replaced. As long as the government does not go against Islam, we can still tolerate it. But once it goes against Shariah, we must oppose it."

"When our governments engage with enemy kafir states, is that not going against Islamic principles? When you dialogue with countries that are anti-Islam and kill Muslims, how can you call yourself an Islamic state?"

"It is the duty for Muslims to oppose their governments when their leaders dialogue with our enemies. It says so in the Quran (Surah 60:9), that those who oppose Islam are our enemies and we must fight against them. So before we dialogue with kafirs, we need to go on jihad against our own hypocrite governments first that are apostates and against Islamic principles."

"The Quran has all the guidelines, rules, norms, laws and punishments we need. The enforcement of the Shariah is the sword we are talking about. Without enforcement of the Shariah the Quran is just words in a book. It is a text with no practical meaning. That is why the message has to be implemented realizedised with determination."

"Sadly over the centuries Islam grew weak and we forgot that the Prophet carried a spear when he spoke. The spear was replaced with a staff (tongkat) instead, as if Muslims were weak and needed a walking-stick to stand up! We need to go back to this original, strong, robust Islam. Like the Prophet we need to carry the spear (tombak) again. If the Prophet carried a spear, then for us today we can carry an M-16!"

"Muslim leaders today have fallen short of the Prophet's example. They mouth empty pious phrases about how they yearn for an Islamic state, but they don't have the guts or will to do it."

"There is not a single Islamic state in the world, not even in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are hypocrites and friends of the United States; their leaders are all corrupt and worldly. The closest we ever got to an Islamic state was the Taliban government in Afghanistan, but the Americans destroyed that, with their Western allies."

"They have left the path of true Islam, that is why they are divided into so many sects and streams of thought."

"Muslims need to realize what it means to be an Ummat. The Ummat is one family, and every Muslim is your brother. It doesn't matter what the colour, race, or country the other Muslim is from, he is still your brother, you must support him and help him when he needs your help."

"But the opposite is also true. Those who are kafirs [non-believers] are not your family. Even if your own parents are not Muslims, they are not your family. They are kafirs, outside Islam. You need not think of them as members of the Ummat. When we forget our ummat [Muslim community], then we become weak and divided. All our divisions come from the West, from Western ideas like nationalism and from their ideologies like democracy and secularism."

"Those who speak for Islam and Muslims can only be the ones whose ideas come solely from the Quran and Hadith. Not the liberals, who try to use reason and rationality to interpret the Quran. This has become fashionable now, but it is against Islam and is not allowed."

"There is no democracy in Islam, so do not try to interpret the Quran and turn Islam into a democracy to suit your needs."

"The principles of Islam cannot be altered and and there is no democracy in Islam or nonsense like 'democratic Islam'."

"Democracy is shirik (unbelief) and haram. Here we do not compromise. Those who claim to be Muslims and do not support Shariah one hundred per cent are all munafik and kafirs, they are out of Islam. No need to discuss with these people, they are not part of the ummat anymore. There is no need to listen to public opinion: kafirs, apostates, liberals, atheists - they are all non-believers."

"Islam's victory can only come through dawah and jihad, not through elections. That's why Islamic parties are on the wrong path, even the better ones like the Partai Keadilan Sejahtera (PKS) here (in Indonesia) and your PAS (in Malaysia). As long as democracy is their chosen path, the end result is haram. Nothing good can come from that which is haram, is that not the case? So if democracy is haram, then what kind of Islamic state can come from that? Certainly not a pure Islamic state. Elections are quite useless."

"The struggle for Islam can only come through crisis and confrontation. Islam is here to change the world, not to be changed by the world. So there is bound to be resistance, that is why the West fears us."

"Those who oppose us must be educated, that is why dawah [summons or call to conversion] is important, to show them that Islam is the only way. But if they still resist, and are willfully stubborn, or if they create obstacles for us, then they must be opposed. In particular all the Muslims who oppose us are apostates (murtad) and they in particular need to be dealt with firmly. We need not care for them, or feel sorry for them. They were the ones who chose to reject Shariah, to reject Islam, and so they chose to become apostates."

"This is the Islamic view of things. We must never compromise, relent, give up, submit to our kafir enemies. We must always keep to the Islamic path, jihad in the name of Shariah, and never be apologetic."

"Remember that jihad is what brought Islam to power and built our community. There can be no Islam without jihad."

Comments From The Watcher

This is scary rhetoric and deeply disturbing for Muslims who may be considered apostate by the Cleric and non-believers alike.

There is a common thread between the words of Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir and Osama Bin Laden. This thread is the strong call to live purely under the Shariah and to live in an Islamic state that practices the faith on the order of the Taliban.

Both Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir and Osama Bin Laden speak about Muslims who are not following the true faith are not of their concern and Osama Bin Laden goes a step further declaring them worthy of killing. For his part, Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir only mentions that these apostate Muslims must be dealt with severely.

"We have shown that Islam can rule the world perfectly for 14 centuries, and during this time of Muslim power we did not borrow ideas like democracy from others, so why do we need to learn democracy from them now?"

Another common thread is the statement that a Muslim state does not need a democratic basis. All one needs to do is read the history of the Muslim Caliphate and the history of the Ottoman Empire to understand that extreme power on this level corrupts even the most holy with the most pure initial motives. History is rife with the caliphs taking liberties with slave children and adding slave Christian women to their harems against their will. Not sure about that, then you need to read the book The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy Wars and The Fate of Non-Muslims by Andrew Bostom.

This book has been exhaustively researched and documents the historical atrocities taken with slave populations, forced conversions, taking of children to raise them in Muslim slave battalions to fight for the Caliph, as well as enslavement and mass sale in slave markets of entire populations. Don't believe me? Ask Andrew Bostom about the history of the diminhi tax. This is a severe tax on Christians and Jews living in Muslim states that is made to be financially crushing to entice a conversion to Islam. How about having to wear the medallion on your clothes that identifies you as non Muslim in the street? How about the difference in legal standards for Muslims and non-Muslims when it comes to suing someone or trying to right a wrong in the legal system. In the Muslim state, the Muslim will always win.

The Cleric mentions that for 14 centuries Muslim rule was effective and clearly better than a democracy, but I beg to differ history does not state that in fact speaks otherwise as an extreme oppressive force that was horrific for non-Muslim populations.

As I read Andrew Bostom's book, I had a profound sense of inequality faced by non-Muslims living in the Muslim state during the Caliphate. Not only did non-Muslims not have rights, had to pay heavy taxes, but in many cases their children were forceably taken from them to be raised as Muslim converts. Many people were simply forced or sold into slavery and many women were simply snatched and used in demeaning ways by the conquerors not even taken as wives but rather forced concubines. Any way you look at it, it was not a rosy picture and one that I would not desire to be forced on anyone or on any population.

I find the picture and future world of Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir foreboding and destructive. I do not see "his world" as a step into the future but rather back to a previous destiny already carried out 14 centuries before that had to be overturned and destroyed as a force of evil.

Posted by The Watcher at Wednesday, August 30, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

What the diplomats and politicians can't accomplish, perhaps teen fashion will. Anti-American sentiment may be running rampant in the Middle East, but Middle Eastern teens are buying American clothes. Based in Columbus, Ohio, Tween Brands has started opening Limited Too stores in the Middle East, including 5 in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia and birthplace of al-Qaida mastermind Osama bin Laden. With a Kuwaiti partner, Limited Too operates 19 stores in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates with more planned.

We've seen it happen before. American jeans fascinated Soviet teens, leading to an increasing appreciation of Western culture despite the cold war. It's a little hard to push the "Evil American" line when your country's youth are clamoring for American brands. Limited Too caters to girls ages 7 to 14, an age when Middle Eastern girls typically wear jeans and shirts on the street. Older teens and women wear full-length coverups and head scarves in public, but may wear whatever they want with friends and family.

American clothing is well-made and has an undeniable coolness factor. Fashion may represent only a toe-hold of changing attitudes, but it is a beginning. The Middle East is slowly embracing western ideas. Music, fashion and fast food are the front runners of change. The younger generation that embraces them will be more disposed to other western ideas in the future. Change is coming to the Middle East. Slowly, surely, unstoppable. Today it's American jeans; tomorrow it may be detente with Israel.

Posted by Secret Citizen at Wednesday, August 30, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Well, I just don't think that the UN has the back bone to take this bull by the horns. Here's the latest from the President of Iran on the nuclear issues.

Iran has shown no sign it will halt enrichment. The world's fourth largest oil exporter has shrugged off the threat of sanctions and said such a move would simply push oil prices up to intolerable levels for industrialized economies.

Oil dipped below $70 a barrel on Tuesday, but worries about the nuclear standoff have curbed selling. Ahmadinejad is not the highest authority in Iran but his comments chime with remarks by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say and who has insisted Iran will press ahead with its pursuit of nuclear technology. Iran insists it has the right to enrich uranium under international treaty.

Western diplomats argue it only has that right if it proves its intentions are peaceful. Iran has said it is ready for immediate talks on its atomic plans but has refused to suspend enrichment before talks start, which was proposed in the package of uncentives offered by the United States, China, Russia, France, Britain and Germany. Russia and China, big trading partners of Iran who have veto powers in the U.N. Security Council, may oppose sanctions moves.

Seems like politics as usual at the United Nations. Big countries putting their own agendas first over work to resolve real issues. I am not painting Russia and China into a corner on this one the US is as bad as they are about protecting its own interests when it comes to the United Nations.

Sanctions, smanctions, they just aren't going to happen. Iran holds oil leverage over the entire world and over its main trade partners Russia, China, France, and Italy. So sanctions will never be agreed upon by the security council while Iran has buddies there trying to cozy up for a discount on their next big oil shipment.

Do I sound cynical, yes, I guess I do. I have been watching the UN very closely these last several months and what I see is an archaic system that is so seriously divided that inactivity is the modus operandi. Look, we still don't even have peace keepers on the ground in Lebanon! There is so much quarreling about how to implement that, who will go, how many will go, that I'm not sure that peace keepers will really even get to Lebanon.

So, I guess what I am saying is that I am not holding my breath for the United Nations to take a leadership role in the sanctions against Iran. I don't think that the US will be able to get anyone on the security council to agree for sanctions as they are so self involved either, so either our President is going to take matters into his own hands again, or we just sweep it under the rug.

Hey what's happening with North Korea? Wasn't the UN supposed to be doing something there too? Whoops, sorry, I wasn't supposed to look under that rug. Make room under there for the Iranian issue.

Posted by The Watcher at Tuesday, August 29, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Are they real? Do they exist? Unfortunately the answer is most likely yes.

Now the real question, do the terrorists and specifically al Qaeda have one?
Of this we are not sure. In an interview in Peter Bergen's book, The Osama Bin Laden I Know, chief al Qaeda lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, stated that al Aqeda had a nuclear suitcase bomb. He stated that it was easy to buy one on the Asian black market for about $30 million and the one that al Qaeda had was being used as a nuclear deterrent. Peter Bergen in his book, himself questioned whether this was bravado or fact.

It is troubling to think that al Qaeda may have found a nuclear suitcase bomb, but when one searches farther on Wikipedia, it appears that these Soviet made nuclear suitcase bombs have a shelf life. As they get older, they become harder to detonate and may instead be used as a dirty bomb spreading plutonium radiation instead of creating a horrific nuclear explosion.

There is conflicting evidence on whether these nuclear suitcase bombs really exist. If they do, they were created during the cold war period by both the Soviets and the Americans. They are about the size of a backpack. The Soviets disavow that they had been manufactured in one conversation and then agree that they exist in another. The information in Wikipedia presents both sides of the argument.

What do I think? I think that they exist. Do I think that al Qaeda has one? Hmm, I'm not sure, but it seems that if they did, they would have already tried to use it. This is the same presumption that Peter Bergen raised in his previously mentioned book on Osama Bin Laden.

Based on the information that Wikipedia mentions, it is more likely that if a nuclear suitcase bomb does get into the hands of a terrorist that it will be used as a dirty bomb due to it's expired shelf life rather than as a nuclear deterrent or as a nuclear weapon. However, this is a bad scenario too and not much better of a tradeoff.

Posted by The Watcher at Monday, August 28, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

The respective cultures of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have many common values. All three worship the God of Abraham and govern themselves by the Laws given by God to Moses. In fact, the Ten Commandments and their derivatives form the basis of the justice systems for many of the nations on earth. Over the past fifty years, cultural values in Islamic societies have remained fairly constant as opposed to the cultural values of many Western societies which have become “liberated”.

Presently, those in the West with liberal values are living in a mindset of self-promotion and doing whatever feels right to the individual. In essence, they feel that they are liberated from the Laws of God. Those who hold to the tenets of Judaism and Christianity are branded by the liberals as intolerant and noninclusive. Those who practice Islam have similar tenets of faith to hold onto and are likewise branded. All who are believers in God/Allah and who practice the tenets of their faith are deeply saddened by the lack of moral restraint practiced by those of the liberated mindset.

Examples of Western culture’s impact on the world include the internet, media, and entertainment. Perhaps the best-known source of Western culture is found in television, which is broadcast around the world via satellite. There are many locations on earth where anyone with a satellite receiver can tune into the signals and watch the programs. For devout followers of God/Allah, the casual sex and homosexual themes coming out of Western broadcasts are in direct violation of scripture. So, as popular as these themes may be with the liberal mindset in the West, the conservative view, and especially the Islamic view of Western culture are adversely affected by these “liberated” values. It’s no wonder that Muslims have branded Westerners as infidels, led by America the Great Satan. Their disgust is well-founded and, when targeted at the liberal mindset, entirely justified.

In Western governments, the will of the people is expressed by those elected to office. Conversely, those elected to office reflect the will of those in their electorate. Therefore, when a majority of society believes in values advanced by the liberal mindset, then the lawmakers are inclined to enact laws in their favor and the judges are inclined not to enforce laws that go against the tide. Such has been the trend in Western countries for some time. As viewed by conservative Islamic societies, the moral decline of Western governments perfectly supports the terrorist’s jihad – their war against the infidels.

As noted in my 8/12/2006 posting “What Makes a Terrorist Tick”, Muslims believe that all people on Earth fall into one of three categories: (1) the faithful followers of Islam; (2) the people of the Book (Jews and Christians), subjugated to second class status and paying the Dhimmi tax; and (3) Infidels who must be killed by the hands of the faithful. Those in the West who practice “liberated” values fall into this third category and are, thus, considered lawful targets by terrorists based on their interpretation of the Koran.

The point is that terrorism is a political movement and, as practiced by Muslim extremists, fueled by the tensions created by Western liberalism. This is a fundamental clash in values between these respective societies – one that I don’t believe can be fixed by mankind.

Posted by Silver Eagle at Sunday, August 27, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Westerners seem to consider Middle Eastern states to be modern countries -- our peers and equals -- but are they? With one foot planted in modern thought and technology, the other seems mired in Third World mentality. It is only since World War II that many Arab states have emerged from their tribal traditions. The royal heads of state are the children and grandchildren of the tribal princes who first united their lands.

While the privileged few live in lavish decadence, many of their subjects continue to live in dire poverty without even the most basic modern conveniences. Politics still divide these countries along tribal lines, often reflecting ethnic roots and religious sectarian interests. Too many people are uneducated, particularly women. Often the only education young men receive is from the local mullah who spouts radical religious epithets in the guise of learned teaching. Many still live in small villages virtually unchanged in character from lifestyles common in the early part of the last century.

Oil catapulted these countries into the modern age. With a people uneducated, untrained and unprepared for the intricacies of modern life, many of these countries have floundered since severing ties with their former European protectors. In most countries the ruling sheiks and dictators and their privileged minions have been unwilling to share the wealth with their countrymen.

What sits in the middle of this bleak morass? Israel. A shining gem of modernity, Israel has pursued technology, education and health care for all its citizens. A truly modern state, democratic Israel is a respected, though not always well liked, member of the world community. It enjoys all the trappings of modern society but one -- peace.

When Arabs look out over their vast, dusty lands at the shining skyscrapers of Israel, perhaps their anger is directed, in part, at what Israel has accomplished but they have not.

Posted by Secret Citizen at Saturday, August 26, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Many people in the world have stated that the presence of the United States military in the Middle East is motivated by America’s need for oil. I have yet to hear one confirmed report that America, or any coalition country, has stolen such wealth from the Middle Eastern countries. Instead, America competes for its oil needs on the world market, often selling crude oil from its domestic wells to foreign companies in one part of the world while importing crude oil from foreign companies in others. That’s the way the global economy works.

Oil is a source of great wealth in the Middle East and much of the technology that enabled its production came from the United States. The peoples of the Middle East should be the greatest beneficiaries of their natural resources. In some cases, their standard of living has improved. In others, only the rich become richer leaving a vast lower class clueless as to why they are not receiving the benefit of their countries’ natural resources.

The United States cannot fix the way leaders of oil-rich countries distribute their wealth. In many documented cases, the vast fortunes of Middle Eastern leaders were reportedly gained via corruption and sleazy insider dealings. For example, it is reported that Iranian Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani amassed a fortune that is the equivalent of $1.1 billion US dollars. Others in the Iranian government have reportedly amassed personal fortunes well in excess of $100 million. In addition, it has been documented that Saddam Hussein amassed the equivalent of $10-20 billion, Yasser Arafat amassed $4-6 billion, etc. In every documented case, this represents wealth that was stolen from their peoples.

Some of the good people of these lands are getting by on the equivalent of a few hundred dollars per year. Those fortunate enough to have high positions in government have been disproportionately rewarded for their contributions. The wealth of some has been lawfully gained through means not associated with their positions in government. However, the wealth of others was gained as a result of their positions in government. In democratic governments, this is known as conflict of interest, misconduct in office, or simply theft. Even if their government-related wealth was lawfully earned, annual incomes on the order of millions of dollars are excessive, and certainly ensure lifestyles far above those of the common people. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine why a government leader would want or need hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars.

Remember the multiple lavish palaces of Saddam Hussein? This was a personal lifestyle afforded Saddam at the expense of the good people of Iraq. They were built in addition to the billions of cash he had already siphoned from his country’s wealth. To put it into perspective, the cash alone came at a cost of about $500 US dollars for every man, woman, and child in Iraq. The palaces, infrastructure to support the palaces, and the incredible amount of war materials that went into protecting them cost the people of Iraq many times this figure.

So, although there are people who would like make oil the central issue of Middle Eastern problems, this is simply not the case. The better questions for them to ask are how wealthy are their government leaders and where did their wealth come from? If their wealth was wrongfully taken from their peoples, then start there. Stealing is forbidden by the Prophet in the Koran, so a more appropriate course of action is to hold their leaders accountable under the Sharia (Islamic law).

Posted by Silver Eagle at Saturday, August 26, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Tuesday August 15th, we asked our readers to vote on whether the Israeli/Lebanon ceasefire would hold. Well the votes are in and no it will not has a slim one vote victory. The comments returned were interesting and insightful. Here are a few snippets:

The cease fire will be broken by HIZB, and Israel will look the other way. Israel was not allowed to win. The wimps of the west wanted peace so the vile terror groups can regroup to fight another day. Israelis are not martyrs and do not want to die for 72 virgins, thus this was a total waste of lives. The job was not done, nothing was achieved, Hizb thinks they won, Syria, thinks it can take back the Golan and the UN wimps just empowered other hate groups to step up and do this again. The war is not over, it will just go on in a different fashion. Nothing was achieved in the last 34 days. Terror still exist, hostage taking does work, and the circle will goes on and on.

No, because the militants both sides of the border hate each other so much - the last thing they want is peace. If only they could see that they are both being used, as is this hatred, by a superpower whose only concern is to secure energy supplies for it's corporations.

Nobody knows the answer to this question, but we can hope that it will hold.

I highly doubt it will hold way too much hatred. another thing. You cant physically fight terrorism it's not possible. Terrorism is a state of mind. anybody a little sick in the mind that turns to civilian targets is a "terrorist". Terrorism will always exist. the only way to end terrorism is if there is no people left alive anywhere (a sad thought). Yes it is sad but it won't end.

Well I think Israel won the day. They have shown backbone,while everyone else sat on their backsides. If you give in to the kind of people like hezb, then you might as well give up on life. We in Great Britain have some responsibility for the situation, we allowed Israel to be formed out of another nations land. Lets all go back to caves.

These are some interesting viewpoints. If you want to add to them, I welcome your comments, just click comments at the bottom of this post and enter what you think.

Posted by The Watcher at Friday, August 25, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Yes it can happen again, and it most certainly will, maybe not in the same way, but all the signs point to the fact that al Qaeda is certainly planning its next "big event".

What can we do to be prepared?
As US citizens, we can be vigilant in our own communities. We can be prepared for our families. That means setting up a disaster store. Homeland Security has some nice checklists of things that you should have for you home in preparation. Do I have them myself? No, but I think that I will this weekend, and especially before the anniversary of September 11th go and make my stockpile.

We can also empower our government and law enforcement agencies by not allowing lawmakers to tie their hands. No, I am not advocating illegal wiretaps and racial profiling, but there is a fine line and I think that law enforcement agencies should certainly be able to do some important things covertly.

We can have an action plan of escape for our families. My family has a plan in case of attack. Where we will meet, how long we will wait, where we will arrive out of the area; logistics in the event that something disastrous does happen.

What is being done?
Much is being done. Although I have a love/hate relationship with the Bush administration, even I was surprised to read that US Air Marshalls were on the flight to India yesterday and averted a potential attack. I thought that Air Marshalls were only on US and US bound flights. Way to go guys!

We can push to secure our borders and let our lawmakers know that this is about more than an immigration issue. Ask for their support to create fair laws for immigrants and avenues to prevent illegal immigration which terrorists exploit for entry and arms import and export.

No, we can not wave a magic wand and have our country and world become safe as it was before 9-11, but we can become proactive and supportive of the changes that our government is bringing about. Does that mean we have to tacitly accept and support all changes? No, but sometimes they simply have intelligence that we do not have to make a specific decision that will impact us.

We must be watchful and we must be prepared!

Posted by The Watcher at Thursday, August 24, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

In the various books that I have read I have come to the understanding that al Qaida has targeted the US due to its foreign policy and its role of advocate for Israel. Clearly there are other issues as well, but these seem to be the front runners.

Tell what do you think al Qaida wants? I am interested in hearing your perspective. Just click the comment link just below this post and you can leave any information with your name or anonymously.

Here is my list of what I believe al Qaida wants from my research:

1. Have the US change its foreign policy in regard to the Middle East namely stop supporting Israel and get out of Iraq.
2. Have the US get troops out of all Muslim Middle Eastern lands. The US no longer has troops in Saudi Arabia, but has many in Yemen, Iraq, and other nations in the region.
3. Unite the Muslim states in the Middle East into one large nation state that is devoutly Muslim and uses the Sharia (Muslim religious legal code) as the basis for its laws.
4. Expand the Muslim faith message worldwide and challenge people to accept the Muslim faith to bring al Qaeda's view of Heaven to Earth. Well if you're challenged, you will either accept to convert to the faith or be killed. Harsh, you say? Yes, but it is the truth.
5. Call all Muslim believers to practice the external jihad and purify the Muslim faith of apostates and clear the world of infidels (non believers). Well in clearing the world, that means killing non-believers.
6. Destroy Israel. Al Qaeda considers Israel the ultimate intruder on Muslim lands and must go or be destroyed. There is no middle ground on this point for them, no peace negotiations, just removal of Israel and the Jewish people.

What do you think should be added? Take a second and let me know. I'll post a special review of comments that readers have written in on Monday so check back. It will be highly interesting to read what our readers around the world have to say on this topic.

Posted by The Watcher at Thursday, August 24, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Sure looks that way doesn't it. If you have been following the news yesterday and today, US air Marshall arrested 12 people on a flight to India. They were arrested after they simultaneously started fiddling with cell phones and material held in plastic bags. Suspicious based on the plot that has recently been broken up to explode 12 planes from Britain to the US.

This plane had been bound for Mumbai, India. Mumbai has recently also been in the news for terrorist bombings. It appears that the terrorists have not felt that their work was done in Mumbai and were looking for another event.

Based on historical Muslim land holdings and the thought in extremist factions of Islam, once part of the Muslim empire, always a part of the empire, we will expect to see more strife and targets in this region.

Posted by The Watcher at Thursday, August 24, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Peter Bergen has written a fascinating book about Osma Bin Laden called The Osma Bin Laden That I Know and it is interesting reading. Here are some things that you may or may not know about Osma Bin Laden.

• Osma Bin Laden is unusually tall. He is over 6 foot 5 inches.
• Osma Bin Laden is very soft spoken. He can be passionate, but speaks softly and humbly even when speaking hate rhetoric.
• Osma Bin Laden follows the teaching of radical cleric Abdel-Rahman, who is currently imprisoned in the US on the first World Trade Tower bombing.
• Those closest to him state that he is a charismatic leader but that his message of killing women and children when challenged can not be upheld to match Koranic teachings -- he does not have the religious foundation to rationalize these actions to his followers' satisfaction. Rather, his message of killing Jews and keeping the "Crusaders" from taking oil and riches from Muslim lands is instead the message that resonates with his followers.
• He is constantly surrounded by a staff of body guards. One of whom follows behind him at all time with a gun carrying two bullets. These bullets are to be used to kill Osma to prevent his being taken alive by his enemies.
• He has foregone all trappings of wealth. He lives simply and almost in poverty. He considers all of his millions of dollars of wealth to be used only to further Muslim causes and to be used by the movement. He does not consider his wealth his to use for his personal living expenses. Here in lies one of his most powerful examples from the viewpoint of his followers. He lives just like them. All his money he uses for his causes. This sacrifice has garnered the prestige, love, and admiration of many in the Islamic community.
• He is extremely charismatic and his reputation and "legend" far precedes him. He is elevated to a position of extreme respect by his followers.
• He does not plan any of the al Qaida attacks, but is most certainly involved in giving the final approval or green light for the majority of cataclysmic attacks.
• He has had his Saudi citizen ship revoked. His family has disowned him, but in name only. His mother and brothers from Saudi Arabia still occasionally visit him in Afghanistan.
• He is particularly devoted and attentive to his mother. He maintains regular communication with her.
• He has several wives and scores of children. They live harmoniously in a communal setting. Usually each wife has her own separate household.
• He is an extremely devote practicioner of the Muslim faith and very well read on Koranic disertations. He is equally a very strong father and leader of his family. He is well loved by his wives and children. Here again is a very strong draw for his followers, in his personal life and in all he does in his personal realm, he is a man of loyalty, love, and truth.
• He is has probably been hiding in Afghanistan but has probably moved recently to one of the remote urban areas in Pakistan and travels frequently through mountain paths back and forth to Afghanistan.
• His focus is on the destruction of America and then the destruction of Israel.
• Most of his financial assets have been frozen by the Saudi's or Americans. However he still is considered and is one of the major financier of al Qaeda's operations.
• It is not uncommon for him to personally pay off a martyr's debt for a family or to provide some kind of personal relief to families left behind by a martyr to the cause. He usually does this through an intermediary.
• He surrounds himself mainly with Saudis. Although his training camps provide training to Muslims from all backgrounds. Those that travel in his innermost circle are either Egyptian or Saudi.
• He comes from one of the most wealthy Saudi families and one that was and still is closely aligned to the Saudi throne. His father did many state sponsored building projects for the Saudi royal family and through astute business garnered a vast fortune and holdings through these connections although he did not come from a family or prestige. The family is still involved in day to day construction operations in the Middle East. Bin Laden's father died when he was 10 and several of his brothers now run the company.
• After Bin Laden's father's premature death, the Saudi King put the Bin Laden construction company in Trust so that when the children were older, the company would be there for them, and while in trust would provide income to the family.
• Osma Bin Laden's son Abdullah has rejected his father's way of living in poverty. He has aspired to live in a means deserving of his family's wealth. He left his father and lives in luxury in Saudi Arabia.
• At one time the Saudi Arabian government sent a paid assassin to try to kill Osma Bin Laden.
• Early in his radical career, the Saudi government offered to double Osma Bin Laden's $200 million in assets if he would return to Saudi Arabia and state that the Saudi royal family was governing according to Muslim law. Osma refused to do this, and the Saudi government froze his assets and stripped him of his citizenship.

Osma Bin Laden is a charismatic leader. He reaches followers at a very deep religious level although his call to action does not truly have a religious foundation.

Posted by The Watcher at Wednesday, August 23, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

It is time for Kofi Annan to go. In January 2001 he was elected to a second five year term as General Secretary for the United Nations. This year his term of power is over. That is ten years of leadership going no where.

It is time for new blood to come in and rejuvenate the UN. It is time for stronger cohesive leadership. As I review the UN website, I see that the UN has done great things as a humanitarian relief resource over the past years, but I also see a lack of guidance in times of trouble.

In America we have a term for the lack of effectiveness near the end of a term of an incumbent President - a lame duck. With Kofi Annan cycling out at the end of this year, we need to see strong new proactive leadership starting to emerge. At this point however, I see none!

As I did research on the Web, it became apparent that the General Secretary is selected in an unusual way.

The Secretary-General is appointed to a five year term.

UN Secretaries-General usually serve two consecutive terms, but sometimes only one. The Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Security Council.

Therefore, the selection is subject to the veto of any of the five permanent members of the Security Council.

By convention, the position rotates by geographic region, but since Boutros Boutros-Ghali of Egypt served only one term, a successor from Africa, Kofi Annan of Ghana, was chosen. When Annan had finished his first term, the member states were so impressed with his performance that he was appointed for a second term despite the fact that the next Secretary-General should have been from Asia. There has not yet been a Secretary-General from North America or Oceania.

Most Secretaries-General are compromise-candidates from middle powers and with
little prior fame. High-profile candidates are often touted for the job, but are
almost always rejected as unpalatable to some.

As I read further in Wikipedia about the process of of the selection of the new General Secretary of the UN, it is apparent that this is not a democratic process but a "club selection". A powerful cohesive leader is never selected as they are too polarizing to the greater group and would take over some of the control of stronger UN members. This process of selection assures that a real leader is never selected.

Wikipedia also mentions some possible canidates:

Some consider it to be Asia's turn to fill the post. No announcement has been made, but behind the scenes China is already pushing the candidacy of Thai Deputy Prime Minister Surakiart Sathirathai, who also seems to have the support of the U.S., RRussia, and Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Former Foreign Minister of Timor-Leste and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate José Ramos-Horta is also considered a strong candidate, as is Jayantha Dhanapala of Sri Lanka. Dhanapala is well reputed in UN circles especially for his contribution to disarmament issues.

Other possible candidates are South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon; undersecretary general for the department of public information Shashi Tharoor of India; Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Prime Minister of Norway and former director General of the WHO; Tarja Halonen, the current President of Finland; Vaira
Vīķe-Freiberga, the current President of Latvia, and Aleksander Kwaśniewski, the former President of Poland.

There is also a strong feeling that it should be a female Secretary-General this time, because secretaries for the past 60 years have all been men. Current New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark, and former New Zealand Governor-General Dame Silvia Cartwright have been tipped as candidates after being promoted by international women's group Equality Now.

It appears that even with Kofi Annan leaving at the end of this year the reality is that we will not see strong leadership at the United Nations.

It appears that it will be business as usual, strong nations on the security council making decisions out of political and economic self interest that does not benefit the larger group. I am not holding my breath for a new leader to replace Annan that will be a consensus builder, I do not believe that the UN has the fortitude to select a leader of this nature.

Posted by The Watcher at Tuesday, August 22, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

I am outraged and horrified. What happened yesterday in Baghdad was barbaric. On a day in which hundreds of thousands of Shiite pilgrims slowly processed through the city to the shrine of Imam Moussa Kadhim, one of 12 Shiite saints, Sunni snipers took careful aim and deliberately killed 20 pilgrims -- men, women and children. A picture in my local newspaper showed one anguished family -- father, mother and 3 brothers -- torn with grief for the death of their son, Wisam, only 13, who was shot dead in their midst as the family walked in procession with hundreds of other pilgrims.

Have these terrorists no humanity? How can men who profess to be devout Muslims so defile their faith? Historically, even in times of war, observance of faith on high holy days has been recognized as a time for peace, fleeting though it might be. In the Middle East, offensives and cease fires have been timed so as not to interfere with Ramadan or Yom Kippur. Both sides have often shown mutual respect for the importance of these and other holy days as a time to put aside war and embrace peace, or at the very least, humane tolerance.

Apparently for Sunni terrorists, such holy days mean only a day of easy targets. It must have been like shooting fish in a barrel to take aim at slowly walking pilgrims, their heads bowed, focused on religious thoughts, women moving slowly in their black Islamic robes, children holding a parent's hand. How brave, how strong, how courageous to shoot such an obvious threat. I'm sure each one will go straight to heaven, though I hope their heaven is hell.

Posted by Secret Citizen at Monday, August 21, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Civil war is brewing in Iraq and if you think it won't happen, think again. After a detailed review into the history of Iraq, I feel that a breakup of this nation state is eminent regardless of any efforts to hold it together.

Iraq is one of four multiethnic or multireligious states that was created by treaty at the end of World War I. The other three nation states were the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia. Of the four nation states created by the Treaty, only Iraq remains intact. Well if you call it that. I call it a civil war in the making. The other three nation states have already splintered apart.

There are two huge issues causing the eminent civil war in Iraq. The first is the desire for the Kurds in the Kurdistan region of Iraq to be self-governed. In fact, in a straw ballot in 2004, over 98% of adult Kurds voted for an independent Kurdistan. The Kurds already operate autonomously in Iraq; manage their own borders, assign their own taxes, and have an effective police and military in place. They even have their own "national" government. In fact they would like to separate from Iraq so badly that they do not even fly the Iraqi flag.

The Kurds are a large unique population. They have their own language, their own culture, and customs. They are Sunni Muslims, but practice a much more relaxed version of the faith than the minority Sunni Muslims do in the rest of Iraq.

The Kurds desire their freedom and self governance. Originally, in the Treaty of Sevres, at the end of World War I, the Kurd populations in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey were promised their own nation state if they voted to self govern and there were no objections from Turkey, but Turkey quashed this when Mustafa Kemal came into power. If the Kurds in Iraq, a population of about 6 million, create their own nation state, then the Kurd populations in Turkey (population of about 8 million) and Syria will probably also desire to join this new nation spreading strife in the region.

The second issue that will most certainly split Iraq apart is the differences between the majority population of Shiite Muslims and minority Sunni population. Remember, the minority Sunnis wielded great political and economic authority over the Shiite majority under the reign of Saddam Hussein. Not only are there huge religious divides between the two, but also bad blood because of the Sunni repression against the Shiite in very recent past history.

In Iraq, this unusual combination of a melting pot is not American in style. Each faction has its own geographic region, governance, and militia in place. Iraq was a very loosely held union even when Saddam was in power. Now, with the ability to choose its own way, Iraq is splintering along old traditional lines - Kurd, Sunni, and Shiite.

I do not feel that anything will be able to hold this last nation state, vestige from World War I, together. I predict that we will see increasing violence as the Kurds actively pursue their drive to self-government and Turkish and Syrian Kurds move to join this new nation. The Shiite and Sunni struggle will be magnified by slaughter on both sides and Iran will become increasingly involved in moving the remaining splinter of the new Iraq to a Muslim theocracy along their own model.

Civil war is inevitable in Iraq. American in its desire to bring peace and democracy in the Iraq and the greater Middle East has unleashed the dogs of war.

Posted by The Watcher at Monday, August 21, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

From the rhetoric of Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad and Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, there is little doubt that they were behind Hezbollah in funding, training, and advanced military hardware. Therefore, it is certain that such support will continue as it is their stated objective to destroy Israel. As long as these two figures are in power, there will not be peace in the Middle East.

The deeper problem is that they are kept are in power by the peoples of their respective governments. Which means their ideology is endorsed and practiced by the rank and file. From a top-down point of view, the folks on the working level mostly follow whatever is fed them. So the real danger is that when leaders of this mentality are at the top, then it is the millions of people below them who will bear the consequences of their actions.

The world doesn’t need to look back very far in history to recall the horrors inflicted by a similar mentality – that of Adolph Hitler. Fortunately, Hitler was stopped while still in the progress of developing nuclear weapon technology. Had he succeeded, then the outcome of World War II would have been far more horrendous. Some 70 years later, the world is again faced with a remarkably similar threat. The rhetoric by President Ahmadinejad is inflammatory enough as it is, but coupled with his stated intention of developing advanced nuclear technology, his government is the most destabilizing influence in the world today.

World War II was fought and won in order to counter the imperial goals of a cadre of despots. The United Nations was established to forever prevent the emergence of another Hitler-like threat to world peace. However, such a threat is front and center in front of us and it looks like the UN leadership and world leaders have no clue what appropriate action to take. Instead, world leaders are looking after their own financial interests and hoping to find consensus. The problem is that the path to consensus leads them toward indecisive policy and inaction. Their delays and their acts of impotence will eventually cost many of them everything.

Posted by Silver Eagle at Sunday, August 20, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Well, the news announced this morning that Israeli commandos were mopping up in Lebanon this morning in a seemingly surgical raid. Israel announced that the troops went in to stop the inflow of arms from Syria to Hezbollah. The UN agreed that this action broke the ceasefire when Hezbollah loudly complained.

If this was a legitimate raid to stop arms, where are the satellite photos showing the convoy? Where is the proof? Israel needs to be aware that with the world watching, they can not take unilateral action and not risk being perceived as the perpetrator in these actions. The raid may have been justified and then again maybe not. I for one, would have liked to have seen the smoking gun.

This battle is now being fought in perception, who is the aggressor and who is not. Israel must be mindful of this and address world public opinion. If there really was a convoy, where are the photos of the cached arms found in Syrian or Hezbollah possession? Where are the smiling Israeli troops in front of the boxes of missiles and guns being removed from trucks? Where are the Syrian drivers holding up their national document papers for proof of citizenship? Where is the satellite footage showing the trucks crossing the border?

In today's high tech age, when world opinion is shaped by the press and television, to not present this proof to the world makes Israel appear to be the breaker of the ceasefire and adds legitimacy to Middle Eastern opinion that Israel is an aggressive nation, will always be one and needs to be contained by violence.

Israel may have had legitimate reasons, but to not present them on the world stage in this case was a serious mistake.

Posted by The Watcher at Sunday, August 20, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Are fear and prejudice giving way to racial profiling? That's what lawyers charged in Marietta, Ohio as two college students were released six days after being arrested on terrorism charges for buying hundreds of cell phones. It was echoed by lawyers in Michigan where terrorism charges were also dropped against three Palestinian-American men being held in Michigan, though they are still jailed, charged with conspiracy to defraud consumers and money laundering.

Civil-rights advocates and the Arab-American community say the two college students from Dearborn, Michigan were unfairly labeled terrorists because they were of Middle Eastern descent and demanded an apology.

"Today in the United States, living while Islamic, living while Middle Eastern, is seriously problematic," said Jeffrey Gamso, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio. "We are driven by fear, driven by prejudice."

The Ohio prosecutor and law enforcement officers denied the allegations of racial profiling and said terrorism charges were dropped against the two students for "lack of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt." Though released on a $1,000 bond, the two still face a misdemeanor charge of falsification for using fictitious names to purchase cell phones.

People buy and sell cell phones all the time. But it is suspicious to buy hundreds, particularly when you're shopping in small towns far from home and using fictitious names. The Radio Shack employee was right to report the suspicious purchase and the law enforcement officers who responded were right to take these two young men into custody. Were they merely pursuing the American dream, spending the summer before college buying phones for resale by a businessman in their Michigan hometown? If so, why shop so far from home and why use fictitious names? These kids had to know something wasn't quite right. And though he claims to have been cleared by the FBI, where does this businessman sell hundreds of cheap phones and where do those profits wind up?

Are we paranoid to suspect terrorism? I don't think so. Cheap American cell phones are sold in overseas markets to amass quick funds and launder money. Because they are hard to trace and track, cell phones are used by terrorists to detonate bombs, as GPS devices for tracking potential targets, and for communication within terrorist cells. It was the act of purchasing large numbers of phones, not the fact that they appeared to be Middle Eastern that brought both the students in Ohio and the three men in Michigan to the attention of police. But did the fact that they were all of Middle Eastern descent contribute to the officers' suspicions? Possibly.

My son-in-law had an Iranian father, although he was adopted and raised by white Protestants in a Christian home. He has worn a goatee or beard since high school. Given the arctic winds of Chicago winters, he typically grew a full beard to protect his face. After 9/11 he started getting stares and rude comments when he rode the train or bus around town. For the first time, he felt uncomfortable in a town he had called home for 5 years. He trimmed his beard back to a small goatee which he still maintains to look less threatening, less Middle Eastern. My daughter's best friend is a first-generation American whose parents immigrated from India. She experienced the same prejudice after 9/11 while a student in San Francisco.

We cannot allow ourselves to fall into fear and prejudice. We do not want to revert to the fear-driven intolerance that created the Japanese camps of World War II. America was built by immigrants. It is a melting pot of cultures, ethnicity, and ideas. That has always been one of our great strengths as a country. It is important these days to consider the act and behavior, not the appearance of a person in making judgments. Racial profiling and prejudice will only benefit terrorism by broadening the gaps between cultures and alienating Muslims and the Middle Eastern community.

Posted by Secret Citizen at Saturday, August 19, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

What do you think? Does the UN carry the political clout to forge a peace in the Middle East or is it an archaic bureaucratic albatross that has lost its world status.

What are the alternatives? Is NATO viable and able to step in? How about specific countries?

Where do you stand on the UN?

Posted by The Watcher at Saturday, August 19, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

War involves manpower, equipment, technology, timing, and luck. We saw each of these qualities in the most recent 34-day war. It was a very asymmetrical conflict that shows the massive advantage Israel holds in offensive capability. It also showed the tenacity that Hezbollah guerillas held in defending their territory. After both sides stood down and the dust settled, the statistics (courtesy Associated Press) revealed that 1181 Lebanese were killed compared to 157 Israelites killed. If body count alone is considered, the Israelite military held a decisive victory. Pictures from the news services confirmed that the destruction of Lebanese infrastructure exceeded that of Israel by a significant ratio as well. The overall economic loss to Lebanon was estimated at 9.4 billion US dollars as opposed to 3 billion to Israel. Displaced people in Lebanon numbered 916,000 as opposed to 300,000 in Israel. OK, Israel won but that isn’t the complete picture.

Hezbollah avoided complete annihilation, kept their two Israelite soldiers hostage, and by the latest accounts will not be forced by the UN to disarm. Looks like a consolation victory for them as well – you could say they came in second place. However, let’s not forget that their “victory” came on the backs of innocent civilians killed, injured, and displaced. Whether or not the noncombatants wanted this war, which was provoked by Hezbollah in the first place, they were deprived of their peace and prosperity. Now Hezbollah is attempting to spread good will by handing out thousands of dollars in relief. I wonder if the good people of Lebanon will recognize that one hand of Hezbollah caused their losses while the other is attempting to buy their allegiance.

Both hands of Hezbollah serve the same head, one whose interest is not peace and prosperity but rather the annihilation of Israel. Perhaps this is the basis of Hezbollah’s popularity – the people of Lebanon are willing to sacrifice their peace and prosperity for such a cause. If so, then the popularity of Hezbollah appears to be reinforced, leaving little doubt that they will take advantage of the relative peace by improving their arms and tactics for the next war. According to press articles, the resupply of war materiel is already flowing in from Iran.

The losers of this war were the peoples of Israel and Lebanon who were killed, injured, displaced, and otherwise affected by this war. This war was started on hatred and revenge, and achieved nothing but the misery of these peoples. Essentially, the Hezbollah leadership has robbed them of the ability to live in peace, prosper, and enjoy life. They picked a fight with a world-class Defense Force and hid behind civilian infrastructure so the brunt of the counterattacks was borne by the people of Lebanon. That is why Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organization. They waged war without sanction by the Lebanese government, violated the International Laws of Armed Conflict, and violated the Geneva Conventions.

Posted by Silver Eagle at Saturday, August 19, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

This is interesting, guess who was handing out whose money in Lebanon today? Well, Hezbollah was handing out cash, just like a FEMA, to Lebanese returnees.

Some people received as much as $12,000 in cash in the handouts. But can you guess who is supplying the cash? Well, it is Iran, are you surprised? Hmmm, it seems funny that when the Lebanese/Israeli war was on and we were all wondering where the arms were coming from that Hezbollah was using, Iran was quick to distance themselves from Hezbollah and state that they had not funded nor had been involved with Hezbollah for quite sometime.

Yet now today, Iran is admitting freely that over $1.5 million in relief being funneled through Hezbollah is from them. Kind of makes you doubt the previous statements that they had made about not been helping Hezbollah in the heat of battle doesn't it?

If we analyze the situation we see that we have brothers at heart in Hezbollah, the majority population of Iraq, and Iran. You see, all share the Shiite sect faith of Islam. Shiites and Sunnis are the main sects of Islam and are diametrically opposed to each other. Worldwide the Sunni population is the largest, but in this corner of the Middle East Shiites reign. Hezbollah and Nasrallah are Shiites, Iran is Shiite, and the majority of the population of Iraq is Shiite. With Iran being the only Islamic democracy in the region, they are accepted by the Shiite faithful as the region's leader. It is no surprise that Iran is stepping up relief efforts to their Shiite brothers in Lebanon.

Now, based on these actions do you doubt Iran's hand in the civil strife that is rapidly developing into a civil war between Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq? Iran is closely allied with the Iraqi Shiite community and certainly has been aiding and feeding of chaos in Iraq. Iran would like nothing better then to see a Shiite majority take control in Iraq as it is taking hold in Lebanon.

Posted by The Watcher at Friday, August 18, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

I have seen this on several sites on the Web and wanted to address it. I am speaking about "beware Aug. 22 and Iran's apocalyptic view".

There is chatter and supposition that August 22 is the date that Iran has selected to attack Israel or to launch a nuclear weapon. Personally, I think not. The Web is sometimes rife with legends and conspiracy theories, but I think this one is not something that we need to worry about, just yet.

August 22 is an important date for the Muslim community however. This is the date that Muslims celebrate Muhammad's night ride. By tradition, this is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the Prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to "the farthest mosque," which is usually identified as in Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Qur'an XVII.1). This is an important day, but to say that this is the same day that President Ahmadinejad of Iran will use for an attack, I think it is reaching.

Do I believe that Iran is further along with its nuclear plans than the world thinks? Yes, based on what President Ahmadinejad has stated himself earlier in the month in his own words I do. Do I think that Iran has a nuclear weapon now? No, based on having read about the detailed science that it takes to create a bomb and the complex methods for delivery, I do not think that Iran has this technology yet. Will they soon? Most likely.

So from the chatter on the Web about August 22nd, do I think that an "event" will happen, no I do not. But I do think that Iran bear close watching and that the UN really needs to get in there with inspectors and work to force Iran to abandon its nuclear arms plans. With all the problems the UN has, it is right now our only real option to help ease this volatile situation.

Posted by The Watcher at Friday, August 18, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Indian authorities are preparing just in case. They have received a letter from a supposed Al Qaida supporter stating that the Taj Mahal is a bombing target. Police are securing the area as I am writing this.

It is not usual for Al Qaida to tip its hand before an operation. Sometimes Al Qaida will issue veiled information or code words, but usually in video format. Sending a letter in warning prior to an event is not the usual modus operandi. In fact, Al Qaida probably would not warn anyone in the government as their focus is mass death and mayhem. So this is probably the work of a possible sleeper cell, Tamil Tiger operation, but probably not Al Qaida in action. However, it could be the tip of a concerned citizen.

Does that mean that authorities in India should do nothing? No, every threat must be evaluated and every threat must be rated based on the facts. There may be some hidden truths and concerns that we do not see in the Press Release that the police have access to. Civilians must be protected, so actions must be taken even if the threat may not be from Al Qaida, but it may be real from another terrorist group like the Tamil Tigers.

Posted by The Watcher at Friday, August 18, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

I do not live a sheltered life, but I have to say that some of the comments to several of the blog posts recently have uncovered an absolutely shocking undercurrent of anti-semitism that seems to be growing and is now appearing out in the open since the Lebanon/Israeli war.

No, I am not Jewish, but that does not make me any less concerned about comments that are targeted at Jewish people. Comments that say Jews should be killed. Comments that say Jews are the cause of all world problems. Comments that say Jewish people deserve to die and be aggressively eradicated. I can not stand silent and read what some readers have posted on these topics. I am concerned that anyone would even voice views like this. Every person has rights - everywhere in every country not just the US. This is the right to life. A religion does not predetermine one's right to life. No one has a right to kill another simply because of their ethnic background or religious views.

How dare some comment posters write and say that Jews deserve to die. No one deserves to die! It is viewpoints such as these that fuel the terrorist movements worldwide. Terrorism is not just isolated to Islamic causes. There are terrorists who focus on abortion issues, there are terrorists who focus on destabilizing existing governments for their own cause, there are terrorists focused on world economic issues. Terrorism is more than Islamic Extremism. But, terrorism must be stopped in our own back yard first. I will not stand silent and read posts about people and people groups needed to be destroyed and that Hitler was justified in his actions. No, Hitler was not justified. Hitler was a monster and an embodiment of pure evil. His systematic eradication of the Jewish population was heinous and wrong.

Would I take a similar stand for black people, Christians, peace-loving Muslims, or a minority population? You bet! When there is discrimination and overt hate related threats and hate activity, we, as citizens of the world, must take a stand. People who spout such rhetoric must be met head-on. We can not dance around issues such as these under the guise of freedom of speech. Thoughts are first and then actions. We must stop radicals first before they become incited to action. No person or people group regardless of their religion, ethnicity, or background deserves eradication on a mass scale.

So, don't use this blog to voice comments such as these. This blog is for thoughtful discussion, open conversation, give and take dialogue on a wide variety of world issues, but this blog is not a platform for bigotry, racism, or anti-semitism!

Posted by The Watcher at Friday, August 18, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

The article that I just read in the Washington Post has just gotten under my skin! It talks about how the Iranians have set up an exhibit to show cartoons about the Holocaust in retaliation to the caricatures of Muhammad several months ago in Europe. The first prize winner will receive $12,000, second place $8,000, and third place $5,000.

Here in America, our press did not publish these political cartoons of Muhammad, but starting in Denmark and then in Europe, they were widely published, creating a huge outrage on the part of Muslims worldwide. In a diatribe bashing Danes and Europeans, the Iranian President voiced his viewpoint that the Holocaust had been a hoax and never happened. Very dangerous rhetoric I think.

What I find very disturbing is that in interviews today in the Washington Post everyday Iranians made comments like: "After the Holocause was questioned by the President, now I have real doubts about it."

We must never forget the important lessons that history has taught us about the repression of people groups, open threats can lead to the mass annihilation of Jewish people, and the terrible power that leaders wield in the shaping of public opinion.

The cartoon display in Tehran focuses mainly on hate messages and themes of Jewish repression. How a state could sanction and fund this kind of display is sickening. Yes, as some say, it is a test of boundaries of free speech, but it is also a test of restraint and the responsibility of power. Right now, I would give Iran a grade of F in responsibility and restraint.

I have become increasingly troubled over the last several weeks about talk emanating from the President of Iran's office. I find it highly disturbing that this leader would be so irresponsible as to spout rhetoric about desiring to annihilate the Jewish state, and now this.

We, as world citizens must listen carefully to this rhetoric, as the past has shown us that words come first and then most certainly actions. We must be ready to step in and stop actions before they jeopardize a people group, religion, or a sovereign state.

Posted by The Watcher at Thursday, August 17, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

Well our votes are in. The readers who responded said "no the ceasefire would not hold". Several sited various interesting and thought provoking reasons. To read the full comments just scroll down one blog post and then click comments. You can read the full commentary there.

With Israel posturing itself to waffle on embracing the ceasefire, and Hezbollah as well as many in the Middle East trumpeting that "Hezbollah has won the fight," I personally just do not see the ceasefire holding at this point beyond several weeks or months.

If you have strong views, just comment to this post anonymously, if you would like, or to yesterday's post on the voting. I'll look at the comments again later today or tomorrow and post your thoughts.

One thing that I found was interesting was the "conspiracy theory" in one viewers comment to yesterday's post.

"No, because the militants both sides of the border hate each other so much - the last thing they want is peace. If only they could see that they are both being used, as is this hatred, by a superpower whose only concern is to secure energy supplies for it's corporations."

This is a common thread voiced by many in the Middle East. The superpower of which the writer is most likely referring to is the United States.

Many in the Middle East, and for that matter in the jihadist community, espouse that the US in only interested in the Middle East for self serving concerns and fully intends to steal the oil riches of the Muslims. This attitudes stokes the fire of anti-American sentiment region wide and reflects a perception of the US, that may be rightfully deserved from some viewpoints. Therein lies the difficulty of perception that makes it simply so hard for the US to be involved as a major player for peace or democracy in this region of the world.

It is very difficult for the greater community of Muslims, as they watch the US state "we want democracy to grow in the Middle East," and then have some wonder why the US is working closely and supporting financially and militarily many authoritarian governments in this region.

Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian, non-democratic government, Qatar is the same, the US heavily supported the Shah in Iraq. When these events are put into historical perspective, no wonder it is difficult for many who are closest to these events in the region to trust the US's intentions for real democracy, especially if what may evolve is a Muslim mandated democracy.

Posted by The Watcher at Wednesday, August 16, 2006 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post   

What do you think about the ceasefire? I'm taking a poll this next week. Just click comments and you can enter yes or no in the comment box anonymously. I'll post results on Friday August 25th. I have posted some early results already, just check the blog.

Do you think that the ceasefire will work? So far, Hezbollah has launched some rockets, and so far the Israelis have held tight. But I wonder as the Lebanese people return to shattered cities what the response will be. Will there be increased animosity at the destruction? Will the UN forces be able to deliver the needed humanitarian aid to both sides quickly to asage fears and provide sustenance in villages and town that have lost infrastructure on both sides?

Will extremist factions in the Middle East stay out of the area and allow peace to take hold? What do you think? Your thoughts count and can help to shape opinion. This blog has readers worldwide and many in the Middle East. Take a moment and say what you think!

Our poll has been so popular that we are extending our voting deadline so you'll have time to leave your comments. It's easy, let me know what you think!

Posted by The Watcher at Tuesday, August 15, 2006 | Permalink | Comments |