Quotes About "Palestine"


Remember: Israel is bad! Its existence keeps reminding Muslims what a bunch of losers they are.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"There will be no peace until they will love their children more than they hate us."

-Golda Meir-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more ‎violence. If the Jews put ‎down their weapons ‎today, there would be no ‎more Israel'‎

~Benjamin Netanyahu~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an all out war, a war which will last for generations.

~Yasser Arafat~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Palestinian people have no national identity. I, Yasser Arafat, man of destiny, will give them that identity through conflict with Israel."

~ Yasser Arafat ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel. For our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of Palestinian people, since Arab national interest demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism".

~ Zahir Muhse'in ~
Showing posts with label Global Jihad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global Jihad. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

The Victim’s View of Islam

by Bill Warner

Recently the McCormick Foundation financed a seminar about the print media reporting about Islam. The seminar was held under the auspices of the journalism school at MTSU, a state university in Murfreesboro, TN. It is part of the Establishment program of constructing the fine details of Establishment Islam.

The lectures and workshops were lead by Muslims and supporters/apologists/defenders of Islam. The apologists and Muslims contend that the only other view of Islam is that of contemptible bigots, who are driven by the usual demons of hate and prejudice. So all the “good” people, the Muslims and their defenders, gave lectures on the beautiful truth of Islam and how to deal with the “bad” people who oppose Islam. The “good” people have the view that there is there the truth of Islam and the rest of the world is morally corrupt.

This division of the world into good and evil has its benefits, but it is too broad a brush in this case. There is another view of Islam besides the “good” Muslims and their apologists. To see this, go back 1400 years to Medina. In Mecca Mohammed had “proven” his divine status by claiming to be in the same lineage of prophets such as Moses and Noah. There were no Jews in Mecca and the story played well enough. Mecca was the home of “Islam, the religion of peace”.

However, in Medina the town was half Jewish, consisting of three tribes. The Jews of Medina told Mohammed that he was not a prophet and this shattered his foundation as a prophet. Mohammed’s attitude about Jews went from being a spiritual brother to that of an archenemy.

Two years later the last of the Jewish children were kidnapped and adopted as Muslims, the Jewish women were sold into slavery and 800 Jewish males were beheaded. Medina was Judenrein, cleansed of Jews.

What are we to make of this well-documented event and the fact that it is only one of over 70 events of assassination, executions, raids, tortures, enslavements, battles and brutalization of the Kafir (non-Muslim) Arabs around Mohammed? All of this is recorded in the Sira (Mohammed’s biography).

The Muslim’s point-of-view is about this vast suffering is that it was a triumph for Islam, a victory and cause for celebration.

The apologist’s point-of-view of this violence is: that was then, this is now. Christians have done worse. Let’s not be judgmental.

Then there is the third view, that of the Kafir victims of Islam. Mohammed led a nine-year rage of jihad against them. There were pagan Kafirs, Jewish Kafirs and Christian Kafirs, but they were all Kafirs who were annihilated. The cause of all of this suffering was an intellectual idea—Mohammed is the prophet of Allah and every person must declare this “truth” or be subjected to violence. The Kafirs were the victims of Islam, then and now.

The story of the jihad against the Kafirs is told in the Sira and the Hadith (the Traditions of Mohammed). No one was allowed the luxury of avoiding Islam. If you were in the neighborhood of Mohammed, then you had to be for him or suffer violence. After Mohammed had conquered all of Arabia, he died while in the next phase of jihad, the conquest of the Christians to the north of Arabia.

This brutal story is told with great vehemence and force. Mohammed and Allah rejoice at the suffering of the Kafirs. And who cares? The apologist agrees that the violent triumph of Islam over all neighbors was a wonderful success for humanity. The Kafirs are human garbage to be put into the disposal of jihad. Who cares about dead Kafirs? Who cares about the annihilation of native cultures?

Why is it that the history of the Native Americans, Blacks and other minorities can be told, but not the Kafirs? Why can those victims have a place in history, but the suffering to the Kafirs is denied? Why do they have no history? Why can’t the victims of jihad and their history be given a valid seat in the marketplace of ideas?

This denial of the suffering of Kafirs can be seen in how our history books are written. The rise of Islam is glorious, but the suffering of the Christians in Turkey, North Africa, the Middle East, the suffering of the Hindus in Pakistan, the suffering of the Buddhists in Afghanistan are all denied. The victims do not exist in our history. If you die at the hands of Islam, you are invisible to history.

Notice that those who have no compassion for the Kafirs in the story of Mohammed’s martial triumph of Islam don’t care about Islam’s victims today. Islam and its apologists don’t give a damn about the suffering today of Christians in Africa, Pakistan, Iraq, Egypt, the Sudan and on and on. Jewish apologists for Islam do not see the 1400 year old annihilation of the Jews in Arabia being connected to the jihad to annihilate Israel today.

There is another thing about the apologists for Islam. They never refer to Islam’s doctrines of jihad, ethical dualism, subjugation of women and the rest of the Sharia. Instead, they constantly refer to the opinions of Muslim “experts”. But, those who support the victims of Islam talk about the foundational experts--Allah and Mohammed. Once you know Allah (the Koran) and Mohammed (the Sira and the Hadith) you do not need opinions of experts. Why? If the expert agrees with Allah and Mohammed, the expert is right, but redundant. If the expert disagrees with Allah and Mohammed, then the expert is wrong. So who needs the experts’ opinions if you know the facts of Allah and Mohammed?

Why is it when the foundations and the journalism schools meet to talk about how to report about Islam, the victims of Islam have no voice? Why is justice served by denying the deaths of 270 million Kafirs in the Tears of Jihad? Why is it that those who recognize the suffering of the victims of Islam today and 1400 years ago are called bigots and contemptible? Why is it that those who asks for the victims’ story be told along side of the apologists and Muslims are said to be Islamophobic and Muslim-bashers? Why is it that those who know the doctrine of Allah and Mohammed are told they are ignorant and despicable?

There are three views of Islam. The victims’ view is as valid as the oppressor’s view or the apologist’s view. The truth of victims of Islam’s suffering must be told and heard. It is too bad that the foundations do not have the will to finance the complete truth about Islam, instead of the soothing lies told by the Muslim “experts” and their sycophant apologists.

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/the-victims-view-of-islam/
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com

Friday, September 16, 2011

History of the Jihad against Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand & Philippines

Clash of Contrasts - Buddhism and Islam in Malaysia

Before being overrun by Islam, the people of Malaysia and Indonesia were overwhelmingly Hindu and Buddhists. In fact what are today the ASEAN countries had one religion (a mix of Hinduism-Buddhism-Animism) and one culture till the 15th century. They did not look upon themselves as different countries. A large part of today’s Malaysia was a part of the kingdom of Siam (Thailand). And at times Malaysia and Indonesia were under the rule of one single dynasty (Sri Vijaya, Shailendra, Mataram and Majapahit).

The Bas Reliefs of Borobudur in Indonesia and words like Putrajaya (name of the new Malaysian Capital), Tan Sri (honorific title in Malaysia), Garuda (Indonesia’s national air carrier), and names like Megawati Sukarnoputri (Indonesia’s former President), Imam Samudra (the Bali Bomber), which have been derived from the ancient Indian (Sanskrit) language are the only reminders of the Buddhist and Hindu past of the current Muslim population of Malaysia and Indonesia. The clash of the gentle ancestors of the Malays and Indonesians with the violent Muslims is a clash of contrasts.

This is so as there is no greater contrast than that between Buddhism and Islam. While Buddhism is intrinsically and universally non-violent, Islam is a violent, cruel and murderous paranoia as we witnessed in 9/11, 7/7, 3/11 and numerous other events in recent history. The 14 century long history of Islam has been equally violent and bloodied and cruel.

When attacked and massacred by the Muslims, the Buddhists initially did not make any attempt to escape from their murderers. They accepted death with an air of fatalism and destiny. And hence they are not around today to tell their story. But their mindless slaughter evoked another and extremely opposite reaction from another set of Buddhists. This was also the most dramatic one so far – the Mongol invasion of Iran and Iraq by Chengiz Khan and his son Hulagu Khan. These Mongols were some sort of Buddhists by faith, whose homeland had been suffering the depredations of the Muslims for six centuries (from 651 to 1200) when the Buddhist Mongols decided that enough was enough and decided to pay back the Muslims with their own coin – with due premium added! The Mongols slaughtered the Muslims of Iran and Iraq with unremitting cruelty. The Mongols laid waste the countryside, burnt down cities slaughtered the Muslim population en masse, including the Caliph himself!.

The Mongols were matched in their reaction to Muslim Barbarism, only by the Crusaders. And interestingly it was only the Mongols and the Crusaders who defeated the Muslims in their own homeland during the last 1400 years of the existence of the Muslims since 622 CE. Other minor aberrations that turned the tide of the Muslims were the Franks at Tours, the Spanish Re-conquistadores, the Hindus under their king Sivaji, the Nubian marksmen and the Thai’s reconquest of Sultanate of Pattani late in the seventeenth century.

The Malaysians (under their Sri Vijaya and Majapahit dynasties) resisted the Muslims, albeit briefly in the 15th century, only to lapse back to a defensive position and submit to the Muslims Jihadis by the 16th century..

Before their forced conversion, the Malays themselves were Buddhists and Hindu by faith till the 15th century under their kingdoms of Sri Vijaya (Malaysia), Majapahit and Shailendra (Indonesian archipelago). These kingdoms were ardent rivals and were at war with each other and with their northern neighbor – the kingdom of Siam (Thailand) when the Muslim first appeared on the scene.

How Islam came to Malaysia and Thailand

After this longish preamble, we shall see how the Malays resisted the Muslims, albeit briefly in the 15th century, only to lapse back to a defensive position and embrace the religion of their tormentors after a century of resistance.

The Malays themselves were Buddhists and Hindu by faith till the 15th century under their kingdoms of Sri Vijaya (Malaysia), Shailendra and Majapahit (Indonesian archipelago). These three kingdoms were ardent rivals and were intermittently at war with each other and with their northern neighbor – the kingdom of Siam (Thailand).

Interestingly, the entry of Islam in to South East Asia was facilitated by this rivalry and internecine warfare of the three kingdoms of Thailand with SriVijaya of Malaysia and, Shailendra and Majapahit of Indonesia. But the ultimate reason for the conversion of the last Sri Vijaya king, Parmeswara to Islam was deception as we shall see below.

Before the advent of Islam, Sri Vijaya, Shailendra, Mataram and Majapahit were powerful empires from the 13th up to the 15th centuries. The Sri Vijaya, Shailendra and Majapahit kings followed an eclectic faith made up of Hinduism and Buddhism. These kingdoms also had their illustrious counterparts in Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia and Burma (Myanmar). They built magnificent cities. The ruins of Angkor Vat and Borobudur are the most dramatic surviving evidences of their glory. Similar cities dotted Malaysia, and Indonesia in the 12 to the 15th centuries. Their decline began with the coming of Arab dhows (vessels) who carried not just merchandise but also the sword and the murderous mentality of Islam.

The Indonesian-Malay Hindu king who first embraced Islam was named Parmeswara and he became a victim of circumstances when he was tricked into becoming a Muslim. Parameswara was a scion of the Sri Vijaya dynasty and ruled from Palembang. But during Parameswara's time, Sri Vijaya was in decline and Majapahit had become the overlord of Sri Vijaya. Parameswara had a dispute with the Majapahit ruler and was forced to shift his capital from Palembang to the relatively safer Temasek island - now Singapore. There, during a skirmish with the forces of Majapahit, Parameswara killed prince Temagi of Siam, who was allied with Majapahit This angered the Siamese king, who threatened to capture and kill Paremeswara. This led to another string of battles between Sri Vijaya against Siam and Majapahit, in which Parameswara was worsted and he had to flee his new capital the Temasek island (Singapore) island, and seek refuge first in Muar, before fleeing further on to Malacca and deciding to make it his new capital in 1402.

Arabs deceive and browbeat the last Sri Vijaya king Parameswara to marry a Muslim Girl and convert to Islam

Malacca was a trading port frequented by the Arabs, where they had established a colony. At Malacca, the Arabs promised King Parameswara, help in his fight against his rivals from Thailand. From 1402 onwards Parmeswara increasingly became dependent on the Arabs to stave off attempts from the Thais to avenge the slaughter of their prince and the territorial ambitions of Majapahit. The Arab merchant-soldiers whose position became increasingly stronger at Parmeswara’s court offered to send in more forces to fight alongside him, if he converted to Islam. Initially Parameswara scornfully refused this offer. But as the struggle with Malaysia wore on, his position became more precarious. At this juncture the Arab merchants gifted him a princess of Pasai who was a mix breed descendant of the Arab and Indonesian Nikah Mu’tah Marriages (A Nikah Mu’tah is a temporary marriage allowed for Muslims by the Quran).

Pasai, was originally known as Samudera-Pasai later renamed called Samudera Darussalam. Pasai was a thriving harbor kingdom on the north coast of Sumatra in the 13th to the 15th centuries CE. Due to its wealth Pasai had attracted Arab merchants who in the course of time intermarried with local women to create a Muslim community that was half Arab and half Indonesian, as the offspring of these marriages were brought up as Muslims. The area of Pasai is in today’s Aceh province of Indonesia.

Incidentally the term “Pasai” is believed derived from Parsi, or Parsee immigrants from the west coast of India namely Gujarat, some of who migrated for mercantile activities to northern Sumatra in today's Aceh province. Arab and Indian Muslims had also traded in Malaysia and China for many centuries. A Muslim tombstone in eastern Java bears a date corresponding to 1082. But substantial evidence of Islam in Malaysia begins only in northern Sumatra at the end of the 13th century. Two small Muslim trading kingdoms existed by that time at Pasai and Peureulak or Perlak

Borobudur – Big Buddha. This temple complex is in Indonesia and dates back to the 8th century
____________

Coming back to this princess from Pasai, she was from among these half-breed Arab-Indonesian Muslims, and was a maiden of extreme beauty. The militarily weakened king Parameswara fell for her, making his position even more precarious vis-à-vis the Arabs. Parameswara incidentally did not have any heir from his Queen but his new love told him, that she was carrying his child. The lovelorn Parameswara who was becoming increasingly militarily weak wanted an heir desperately. In this desperation and his blind love for his new love, he proposed to her, only to be told that marriage was possible only under Muslim rites for which he needed to convert to Islam. To get an heir Parameswara agreed and recited the Shahada before he could bring his new love from the harem to his palace as his legitimate queen.

But according to Sri Vijaya court records, in reality, the child which his Muslim harlot told him she was carrying was not his but was fathered by an Arab as Parmeswara was diagnosed as impotent by his medical practioners. But the urge to become a normal person and have an heir was overwhelming for Parameswara and that urge compelled him to abandon his ancestral religion and convert to Islam.

The Hindu kingdom of Sri Vijaya transformed itself in to the Sultanate of Malacca after the last Hindu king Parameswara, embraced Islam

Thus, in 1414, for reasons which were amorous and desperate, Parameswara converted to Islam after marrying the princess from Pasai. After his conversion, he assumed the title Sultan Iskandar Shah. After his conversion, his half Arab Queen also encouraged his subjects to embrace Islam and this is how Malacca became a sultanate. Thus Malacca was the first to fall to the Muslims.

This conversion led to waves of conversions in Malaysia and Indonesia, most of whose people converted to the new faith, except in far off Bali which remained Hindu, as it is till this day. The descendants of Parameswara started the first Muslim dynasty and expanded the Sultanate of Malacca. At its height the Sultanate encompassed most of modern day Peninsula Malaysia, the site of modern day Singapore and a great portion of eastern Sumatra and Borneo. The governor of Borneo later seceded from Malacca to form the independent Sultanate of Borneo. For a long time Malacca remained the center of Islam in the Malaysian and Indonesian archipelago (Aceh, Riau, Palembang and Sulawesi). It was from Malacca where imams and ustazes went to all over Malaysia and Indonesia to discuss religion and the like. Muslim missionaries were also sent by the successive Sultans of Malacca to spread Islam to he Hindu and Buddhist communities in the Malay Archipelago, such as in Java, Borneo, and the Philippines (Mindanao). Most of South East Asia at that time was Hindu-Buddhist, except for the Philippines where the population was animist.

In the 15th century the Sultanate of Malacca destroyed the other Hindu kingdom of Majapahit in Indonesia, and also weakened Thailand

The Sultanate's most important regional rivals continued to be Thailand in the north and the declining Majapahit Empire in the Indonesian archipelago (Aceh, Riau, Palembang and Sulawesi) in the south. But within the archipelago, Majapahit was not able to control or effectively compete with the Sultans of Malacca with their new found zeal of Islam, and ultimately came to an end during the later 15th century. After the demise of Majapahit kingdom and the conversion of most of its inhabitants to Islam, the Sultans of Malacca alongwith their Arab allies concentrated on the conquest of Thailand with the purported aim of converted the Thais to Islam.

This imposing temple complex is at Prambanan and is dated around the 8th century. It is located on the Island of Sumatra in Indonesia. It looks markedly like Angkor Wat another but more famous temple complex built later in the 11th century in Cambodia.
____________

The Arabs based in Malacca along with their new converts the Malay Muslims of Malacca repeatedly attacked Thailand and for a time it seemed that they would go storming up the narrow Isthmus of Kra and penetrate up to the Thai capital of Ayuthaya.

During much of the fifteenth century Ayuthaya's energies were directed toward the Malay Peninsula, where the great trading port of Malacca contested its claims to sovereignty. As the erstwhile Hindu-Buddhist states of Malacca along with other Malay states south of Tambralinga had become Muslim early in the century, a resurgent and aggressive Islam served as a symbol of Malay solidarity against the Thais and for a time it seemed that the Thais would also have to submit to Islam. But from the 17th century successive Thai kings allied themselves with the seafaring Western powers – the Portuguese and the Dutch and succeeded in staving off the threat of Islam from the Muslim Malays and their Arab overlords.

Islam in the Philippines

In the Philippines, the Muslims did get remarkable success in converting the population of southern Philippines to Islam.

As far back as 1380, Makhdum Karim, the first Islamic Holy Warrior had brought Islam to the southern tip of Philippine Archipelago (Mindanao). But the efforts to convert the Filipino population en masse to Islam gathered strength after the defeat of the Hindu kingdoms of Sri Vijaya (Malaya) and Majapahit (Indonesia). Around 1414, the war between the Sri Vijaya and the Majapahit Empire ended in favor of the former with the conversion of the last Sri Vijaya king Parameswara to Islam. Following this victory, Muslim Holy Warriors (Jihadis) introduced Islam into the Hindu-Malay empires and converted almost the entire population to Islam.

By the next century, these holy warriors had reached the Sulu islands in the southern tip of the Philippines where the population was animistic and they took up the task of converting the animistic population to Islam with renewed zeal. By the 15th century, most of Visayas (Central Philippines) and half of Luzon (Northern Philippines) and the islands of Mindanao in the south had become subject to the various Muslim sultanates of Borneo and much of the population in the South had been converted to Islam.

Subsequent incursions of Muslim Malay Muslim Holy Warriors strengthened the stranglehold of Islam among the frightened animistic pre-Islamic Filipinos (today’s Moros) in the extreme south. By the early 15th century, Islam had been established in the Sulu Archipelago and spread from there to Mindanao; it had reached the Manila area by 1565. There was sporadic resistance from the local population that was organized in to Barangays. Barangays was a kinship group headed by a datu (chief). Organized resistance to Islam began only after the coming of the Spanish in 1521. Till then, during the period 1380 up to 1521, a major part of the animist population of Southern Philippines had been converted to Islam.

But Islam was not to be the religion of the Philippines, as it had become in Malaysia and Indonesia. A seminal event that was to halt the advance of slam was the arrival of Ferdinand Magellan in the Philippines in 1521. After this the Filipino resistance to Islam received a new fillip. Magellan landed on the island of Cebu, claiming the lands for Spain and naming them Islas de San Lazaro. He established friendly relations with some of the local chieftains who had been battling the Muslims and converted some of them to Roman Catholicism. Over the next several decades, other Spanish expeditions were dispatched to the islands. In 1543, Ruy López de Villalobos led an expedition to the islands and gave the name Las Islas Felipinas (after Philip II of Spain) to the islands of Samar and Leyte. The name Philippines derived from Felipinas, was later extended to the entire archipelago.

Permanent Spanish settlement was not established until 1565 when an expedition led by the Conquistadores, Miguel López de Legazpi, arrived in Cebu from Mexico (New Spain). Spanish leadership was soon established over many small independent communities that previously had known no central rule. Six years later, following the defeat of the local Malay Muslim ruler, Rajah Solayman, Legazpi established a capital at Manila, a location that offered the excellent harbor of Manila Bay to the seafaring Spanish. Occupation of the Philippine islands was accomplished with relatively little bloodshed, partly because most of the population (except the Muslims) offered little armed resistance to the Spanish, as their main enemy had been the Malay and Arab Muslims seeking to convert them to Islam.

But a significant problem the Spanish faced was the subjugation of the Muslims of Mindanao and the Sulu.

Archipelago. The Muslims, in response to attacks on them from the Spanish and their native allies, raided areas of Luzon and the Visayas that were under Spanish colonial control. But these actions were inconsequential as the fate of Islam in the Philippines was sealed, and Philippines was not to go the way as had Malaysia and Indonesia, save for a southern tip of Mindanao.

Consequently, most of the Filipinos (except for those in the south) later became Christian under the Spanish colonization. By the late 15th century, the Sultanate of Sulu, the largest Islamic Kingdom of South East Asia and the Malay Archipelago, encompassed parts of Malaysia and the Philippines. Ironically the Mongoloid looking members of the royal house of the Sultanate of Sulu claimed descent from the Prophet Muhammad to reinforce their credentials in their new found faith of Islam!

Waves of conversion to Islam had just about begun in the late 15th century and were preparing to sweep north across the Philippine archipelago in the 16th century when the Spanish colonialists reached the shores of the Philippines. What followed was a checkmating of one faith by another and the Spanish repulsed further attempts by the Sultans of Borneo to make inroads, both military and religious in to the Philippine archipelago.

So the coming of the Spanish saved the Philippines from Islam, except for the Southern tip where the population had been converted to Islam. This population was derisively referred to by the Spanish as Moros and Moriscos (Spanish for Moor or Muslim). Till today the Muslim population of Southern Philippines continue to refer to themselves as Moros – the name given to them by the Spanish colonialists!

The coming of the Spanish and the Portuguese was also a breather to the beleaguered Thai kingdom.

For Thailand too, the coming of the Spanish and the Portuguese was a breather. The Thais smartly allied themselves with the Portuguese to ultimately destroy the Sultanate of Malacca during the reign of the last Sultan of Malacca, Sultan Mahmud Shah.

It was in 1509, during the reign of the last Sultan of Malacca, Sultan Mahmud Shah that the Portuguese became the first European power to reach Malacca and Southeast Asia in general. The Portuguese fleet was led by Admiral Lopez de Sequira. Trouble however ensued after the general feeling of rivalry between Islam and Christianity was invoked by a group of Goan Muslims in the sultan's court after the Portuguese had captured Goa. Soon, the Portuguese fleet was attacked by Malacca and was forced to flee. Incidentally Goa was then a Portuguese colony in India that was ruled by the Muslims before the Portuguese conquered it.

In 1511, a larger Portuguese fleet from Cochin, India led by Viceroy Alfonso d'Albuquerque came back to Malacca. The Viceroy made a number of demands - one of which was for permission to build a fortress as a Portuguese trading post near the city. All the demands were refused by the Sultan. Conflict was unavoidable, and after 40 days of fighting, Malacca fell to the Portuguese on August 24.

Sultan Mahmud Shah was forced to flee Malacca. The sultan made several attempts to retake the capital but his efforts were fruitless. The Portuguese retaliated and forced the sultan to flee to Pahang. Later, the sultan sailed to Bintan and established a new capital there. With a base established, the sultan rallied the disarrayed Malay forces and organized several attacks and blockades against the Portuguese's position.

Frequent raids on Malacca caused the Portuguese severe hardship. The raids helped convince the Portuguese that the exiled sultan's forces must be silenced. A number of attempts were made to suppress the Malay forces, but it wasn't until 1526 that the Portuguese finally razed Bintan to the ground. The sultan then retreated to Kampar in Sumatra where he died two years later. He left behind two sons named Muzaffar Shah and Alauddin Riayat Shah II.

Muzaffar Shah was invited by the people in the north of the peninsula to become their ruler, establishing the Sultanate of Perak. Meanwhile, Mahmud's other son, Alauddin succeeded his father and made a new capital in the south. His realm was the Sultanate of Johore, the successor of Malacca. But the Portuguese could not retain the possession of Malacca for long, as it was conquered by the Dutch in 1641. Although Malacca changed hands, the saving grace was that the barbaric Muslims were never able to sink their claws in Malacca and this enabled the straits to remain free for mercantile activities for the next five centuries. The fallout of the coming of the Europeans was that Thailand was saved from the threat of Muslim conquest that was looming over it in the 15th and 16th centuries.

The Thais launch a counter attack against the Muslims

Taking advantage of the weakened position of the Muslims, the Thais attacked the Sultanate of Pattani and attempted to re-conquer the territories they had lost to the Sultans of Malacca from 1414, when Parameswara the Sri Vijaya king had embraced Islam and his successors had fought relentless campaigns against Thailand and Majapahit (Indonesia). While they were able to destroy Majapahit and absorb Indonesia (Aceh, Riau, Palembang and Sulawesi) in to the Muslim Ummah by converting the Indonesian Hindu-Buddhist population to Islam, they could not get comparative success against their other rival Thailand. The point to note here is that the entry of Islam in South East Asia was facilitated by the rivalry and internecine warfare of the three kingdoms of Thailand with SriVijaya of Malaysia and Majapahit of Indonesia. The proximate reason for the conversion of the last Sir Vijaya king was deception as we saw above.

In the 16th century, after fighting a single-handed battle against the Sultanate of Malacca for a century, (the successor to the Hindu Sri Vijaya empire), the Thais were nearing the end of their tether. But for the arrival of the Portuguese and Dutch in the 17th century, the Thais might have succumbed to the Sultans of Malacca as had their other rivals the Majapahit empire of Indonesia.

In Indonesia, the Majapahit kingdom found itself increasingly unable to control the rising power of the Sultanate of Malacca. Dates for the end of the Majapahit Empire range from 1478 to 1527. After a series of battles with the Sultanate of Demak, the last remaining courtsmen of Majapahit were forced to withdraw eastward to Kediri. Even this small state was finally extinguished at the hands of the Demak in 1527. A large number of courtiers, artisans, priests, and members of the royalty moved east to the island of Bali which is still dominated by their descendants who still practise their original Hindu faith. But effectively Majapahit had ceased to be an imperial power and by the early 16th century, the emerging Muslim power had eclipsed the once powerful Majapahit kingdom and many of their subjects across the Indonesian archipelago had been converted to Islam.

The Thais too could have been forcibly converted to Islam as were the Malaysians in the 15th century when the Sri Vijaya king was converted to Islam following which the Majapahit kingdom of Indonesia was defeated and destroyed by the Sultans of Malacca (successors to the kings of Sri Vijaya who embraced Islam). Thus when Portuguese and Dutch came in to the scene, the Thais received a much needed breather and they gathered their fading strength to garner enough courage to counterattack the Sultanate of Malacca three times, along with their Portuguese allies and finally brought an end to the rogue infidel Muslim power of the Sultanate of Malacca as a threat to themselves (Thais) as well as to the emerging mercantile powers – the Portuguese and the Dutch. The British gave a final end to the pretensions of the other auxiliary Muslim sultanates, that had succeeded the fallen Sultanate of Malacca. These included the Sultanate of Pattani, the Sultanate of Johore, and the Sultanate of Borneo.

In the 18th century, the Thais had an ambition to overrun both the Sultanate of Pattani and the Sultanate of Johore and reclaim the entire Malay peninsula through the lost Thai towns of Ligor (Nakhon Si Thammarat) and Kataha up to Singapore (earlier known as the island of Temasek) that they had lost to the Muslims when Parmeswara the last Sri Vijaya king converted to Islam in 1441. . But that was not to be however, the Thais checkmated the Muslim ambitions to overrun Thailand and took the war in to Muslim territory as we shall see in the following paragraphs.

The Thais re-conquer the Sultanate of Pattani from the Muslims

In the 13th to the 15th centuries, Pattani intermittently was a part of the Buddhist kingdom of Siam and the Hindu-Buddhist Srivijaya Empire. Saim and Sri Vijaya had a keen rivalry for dominating the Isthumus of Kra in order to be able to dominate the strategic straits of Malacca. The Sri Vijayas were located in Palembang and were a maritime confederation dating back to the 3rd century C.E. During the pre-Islamic era, Sri Vijaya dominated trade on the South China Sea and exacted tolls from all traffic through the Straits of Malacca. State like Tambralinga (know also as Nakhon Sri Thammarat). The growing power of Siam threatened this lucrative monopoly from the 13th century. This led to a string of battles between the two empires despite close affinities in language, culture and religion. This conflict was the chink that allowed Islam to sneak in to South-east Asia in the 15th century.

After the conversion of the last Sri Vijaya king Parameswara to Islam and the transformation of the Sri Vijaya kingdom into the Sultanate of Malacca, the rivalry with Thailand became more acute, as the antagonists now belonged to different religions and with Islam, the erstwhile Sri Vijaya (now the Sultanate of Malacca) found greater zeal to pulverize its long time northern rival Siam with the additional aim of converting the Thais to Islam.

Successive Muslim chieftains of Pattani who were surrogates of the Sultan of Malacca tried to attack Thailand from the Isthumus of Kra.

Four successive rulers of Pattani known as Ratu Hijau (The Green Queen), Ratu Biru (The Blue Queen), Ratu Ungu (The Purple Queen) and Ratu Kuning (The Yellow Queen) tried to conquer Thailand from 1584 onwards. But the Pattani kingdom's economic and military strength proved inadequate to conquer Siam single-handedly and the Thais fought off four major invasions, with the last one threatening the overrun Pattani itself. It was then that the Sultans of Patani allied themselves with the eastern Malay kingdom of Pahang and the southern Malay Sultanates of Malacca and Johore. They jointly endeavored to subdue Thailand.

They got an unique opportunity to stab Thailand in its back when in 1563 a massive Burmese attack from the north against the Siamese kingdom threatened to overrun the Thai capital of Ayutthaya. Seizing this opportunity the Sultan of Pattani, Muzaffar Shah took launched an attack on Ayutthaya from the South. The Thai however proved to be no mean opponents, and despite being weakened by their long drawn out war with Burma, they repulsed the Muslim invasion led by the Sultan of Pattani, Muzaffar Shah who was himself slain during the battle.

But the Thais could not push their advantage to overrun Pattani, Johore and Malacca altogether, as they had to still grapple with the Burmese threat from the north of Thailand. The Burmese intermittently occupied the Thai capital of Ayutthaya. Throughout the 16th and 17th centuries Thais were engaged in constant skirmishes with the Burmese and in these see-saw campaigns, the Burmese more than once occupied the Thai capital of Ayutthaya. The Thais shifted their capital to Bangkok and continued fighting the Burmese invasion. And in 1767, the Thais finally retook Ayutthaya from the Burmese after a devastating campaign. The city was almost entirely destroyed in this war and was rebuilt over the next few years from 1782 onwards when the residence of the king and the royal family during the Rattanakosin period. Following this victory, the Siamese king Taksin succeeded in driving the Burmese invaders from the rest of Siam. His successor, Rama I, established the Chakri Dynasty, which still rules Thailand today.

With the Burmese threat having receded, the Thais turned on their old enemies the Sultans of Pattani, Johore and Malacca. As fate would have it, during this period in the 17th Century, the Sultanate of Pattani had fallen into disarray and was in gradual decline especially during the reign of last queens who ruled Pattani.

Siezing the opportunity, Prince Surasi, Rama I's younger brother and vice-king, invaded Pattani. Pattani's Sultan Muhammad was killed in battle and his capital razed to the ground. According to Pattani sources, about 4,000 Malay soldiers were enslaved as POWs and the most muscular of them were made to work on system of khlongs in Thailand’s new capital Bangkok. To further humiliate Pattani, the symbols of its military strength – the Seri Patani and Seri Negara cannon - were brought to Bangkok. (The Phaya Thani is a prized cannon that once belonged to the Sultan of Pattani This gigantic cannon has a length of 6 meters and today stands in front of the Thai Ministry of Defense in Bangkok. This cannon was confiscated by Thai troops after their conquest of Pattani in 1785 and the defeat of Rattanakosin the Sultan of Pattani. This cannon was brought by the victorious Thais to Bangkok and was presented as war booty to the Thai king Rama I.)

But for the people of Pattani, this war has not ended. The Muslim converts of Pattani never reconciled to the reconquest of Pattani by the Thais and continued to terrorize the Buddhist population intermittently throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. In the 20th and 21st centuries this rebellion has taken the form of an insurgency. And even to this day there are terrorist incidents in Pattani, in which innocent students, teachers and Buddhist monks are routinely murdered.

The Jihad against Malaysia today

Till today the Islam is a destablizing factor in Malaysia and finds expression in the activities of Indonesia based Jemmah Islamiya

led by the smiling terrorist, Abu Bakar Bashir, who along with the Malaysian Jihadis are plotting to transform multi-ethnic Malaysia into an Islamic Caliphate, and fomenting trouble in Southern Thailand.

So even though Malaysia is externally prospering, there is discontent simmering below the surface. The Malays dislike their country being portrayed as a multi-ethnic nation. For them Malaysia is not Truly Asia, they would want to replace the current regime with an Islamic Caliphate, where the Hindus (Tamils), Buddhists, (ethnic Chinese) and Christians are reduced to the status of second class Dhimmis. So although most of the population has been converted to Islam, till today the struggle of the few surviving pre-Muslim Malays and the substantial non-Muslim Malays (ethnic Chinese and Hindu Tamils) against Muslim domination goes on largely unreported.

Lessons from the struggle of Malay Buddhists and Hindus against Islam

The lessons from the continuing attempts in Malaysia by the Jeemah Islamia to convert the country in to an Islamic Caliphate and foment trouble in Southern Thailand is that the sneaky and ruthless tactics of the Muslims can only be outmatched by we being more sneaky and ruthless ourselves. The old English adage “Everything is fair in love and war,” holds greatest relevance while battling the Muslims. And only when we in the Non-Muslim world realize this and go into an overreach with subterfuge against the Terrorists (all of whom are Muslims), and use our still prevailing (but fast closing) edge of superior weapons against the enemy, can the Muslims finally be defeated in the looming Third World War.



Islam Watch

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Tears of Jihad

270 million killed by Muslims.

Islam began with killing of unbelievers right from the start.

For the first century of its existence, Islam was absolutely soaked in blood. The killing only slowed down as the Islamic empire finally ran into boundaries in the 8th century, after about a century of expansionist, imperialist, unprovoked Islamic aggression. Even after the initial expansion slowed, the killings did not end.

These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.

Africa
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary.

The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march. [Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.

Christians
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:

60 million Christians

Hindus
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”

80 million Hindus.

Buddhists
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam); everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million.

Jews
Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.

This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.

"Egypt was 14.5 Million people when first opened in Umar's time. When Napoleon walked in 1000 years later, the country was down to 2.5 Million people. 1000 years of bad management causing famines, ethnic cleansings, genocides, revolts. And that happened to one of the world most advanced civilizations.

1000 years and instead of increasing, instead of remaining 14.5 Million, they went down to 2.5 Million.

Islam is aids. Whoever in bed with it will be infected and die eventually. I used to say Islam is cancer, every muslim is a cancer cell in our society. Though some cancer cells may not or never spread, but once it does, it kills you. Now I found cancer is better than islam, at least cancer is not contagious.



Monday, May 30, 2011

Islam, the Religion of Peace, and Terrorism

I've got an Email from Muslim:

"Truthfully your condeming of our faith would probably have you warned, and if you persisted, would have consequences, of which i am not sure. But there have been cases where people have been put to death for MALICIOUSLY harming the image of our noble master Muhammad, the best creation of God. But you fail to see that islam means peace, just as when we meet each other and say 'assalamu alaikum' 'peace be upon you' to our brothers. We are a tolerant religion, and our communities have and still have many faiths still practicing their own religions in islamic land. From the time of the prophet up until today."

The preceding quote was received via e-mail from a Muslim. Notice that he says Islam is a religion of peace, yet that there would be "consequences" for me in my condemnation of Islam. He then mentions how people have been killed for harming the image of Mohammed. Quite frankly, Mohammed damages his own image when he marries multiple women, advocates lying, and spreads his religion by the sword.

Nevertheless, is Islam a religion of peace? Many of its advocates say that it is. Let's see what the Qur'an actually says.

1. The Qur'an tells muslims to kill and go to war to fight for Islam: Quran, chapters (Surahs) 9:5; 2:191; 2:193; 3:118; 4:75,76; 5:33, 8:12; 8:65; 9:73,123; 33:60-62.

2. Fight for Allah: "And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers, (Quran 2:191).

3. Muslims are to battle for Allah: "Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah; and those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the minions of the devil. Lo! the devil's strategy is ever weak," (Quran 4:76).

4. Kill those against Islam: "The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter," (Quran 5:33).

5. Beheading: "When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger. That is because they opposed Allah and His messenger. Whoso opposeth Allah and His messenger, (for him) lo! Allah is severe in punishment," (Quran 8:12).

6. Allah urges war: "O Prophet! urge the believers to war; if there are twenty patient ones of you they shall overcome two hundred, and if there are a hundred of you they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they are a people who do not understand," (Quran 8:65).

7. Slay non-muslims: "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful," (Quran 9:5).

8. Allah urges war: "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination," (Quran 9:73).

9. Allah urges war: "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil)," (Quran 9:123)

10. Allah urges killing: "...the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease and the agitators in the city do not desist... Cursed: wherever they are found they shall be seized and murdered, a (horrible) murdering. (Such has been) the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and you shall not find any change in the course of Allah, (Quran 33:60-62).

11. Beheading: "Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens..." (Quran 47:4).

12. Allah loves those who fight for him: "Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure," (Quran 61:4).

As you can see, the Qur'an definitely teaches that it's people are to fight for the cause of Islam. This list of verses is important because they are within the holy book of Islam. What are we to conclude if a Muslim is to take the Quran seriously? Is he not obligated to slay non-Muslims, to go to war, to kill those against Islam, etc.? Isn't this what the verses are teaching? Yes, they are and this is the source of Islamic Terrorism.

Salvation

In Islam, there is no guarantee of salvation except in one instance, dying in Jihad. Jihad is the struggle, the battle against those who would oppose Islam and what Islam stands for. This is very important because in the Muslim religion, there is no guarantee of salvation. Please consider the following verses:

Then, he whose balance (of good deeds) will be (found) heavy, Will be in a life of good pleasure and satisfaction. But he whose balance (of good deeds) will be (found) light,- Will have his home in a (bottomless) Pit. (Surah 101:6-9)

In Islam, there is no assurance that the Muslim will be forgiven of his sins. As you can see, the Quran teaches a system of works righteousness. Therefore, no Muslim can ever know whether or not he has done enough good in order to please Allah. This is a burden that many Muslims do not like to bear.

Jihad

If we can see that the Islamic system of salvation based upon works cannot guarantee salvation, but fighting in jihad can, and we could see why Muslims terrorists would be eager to die (and take others with them) for the cause of their religion. It is the only way they can be guaranteed paradise. It is this fundamental principle in Islam that encourages terrorism.

* "Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value)." (4:74, Yusifali).

* "Allah's Apostle said, "Allah guarantees (to the person who carries out Jihad in His Cause and nothing compelled him to go out but Jihad in His Cause and the belief in His Word) that He will either admit him into Paradise (Martyrdom) or return him with reward or booty he has earned to his residence from where he went out," (Hadith Vol. 9, Book 93, # 555).

Do Muslims practice the Qur'an principle of killing non Muslims? Yes they do. Following is a list of some articles that you can read a demonstrate some of the actions taken by Moslems in different parts of the world.



Carm.Org

Friday, October 8, 2010

Iran's Global Terrorist Reach

by Walid Phares

Summary
This article is about the geopolitical expansion of the Iranian regime as well as its terrorist and strategic reach around the world. Iran has developed weapons, created terror networks and established a system of alliances, challenging and threatening the region and the international community.

The United States became painfully aware of the threat posed by global jihadism after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. Until that day, Iranian-backed terrorist networks, such as Hezbollah, were responsible for killing more American citizens than al-Qaeda. In the years since, the balance has been gradually tilting back towards Iran. In the words of former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, al-Qaeda may be the 'B' team of international terrorism, but Hezbollah is the 'A' team. Indeed, Iran's Khomeinists began their war on the U.S. and other democracies years before Osama bin Laden began his jihad.

The takeover of Iran's government in 1979 by radical Islamist forces faithful to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was the breakthrough after which the so-called Islamic Revolution spread throughout the Middle East and beyond. The Khomeinist revolution is ideologically rooted in a radical Islamist doctrine that stands in opposition to the more traditional "Quietist" school of thought among Shia clerics. In a sense, the Khomeinists are the Shia world's equivalent of the Salafists within the Sunni world. The Islamist Shias are also jihadists, in the sense that they call for the establishment of a future Imamate, a Shia form of Islamic Caliphate, by any means necessarily, including what they coin as "Jihad," which practically means war.

Because it cannot project much conventional military power, Iran threatens the United States, Israel and other democracies by unconventional means. Through the use of its terrorist surrogates — such as Hezbollah — Tehran's reach extends around the world.

Hezbollah
The formation of the Iranian-Syrian alliance in 1980 allowed Tehran to penetrate Lebanon's Shi'ite communities and build a militia that enabled it to extend its influence to the Mediterranean. Through Hezbollah, Iran controls the resources of a large religious community in Lebanon and has established itself as a dominant force inside the country. Iran is therefore able to develop networks overseas more easily and engage Israel in direct confrontation from across the border. Furthermore, the alliance has granted greater access to U.S., European, and other interests on behalf of the Khomeinist regime.


Hezbollah was an Iranian project designed to export its revolution globally and it fast became the single most dangerous terrorist network. Since the 1979 revolution, the ayatollahs have invited radical Shia clerics from Lebanon to Iran for theological training. They also recruited militants, including Imad Mughniyeh, who became the central figure in the terror nexus for decades. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (Pasdaran) established its first bases in the northern Bekaa valley in 1980. From there, it connected with "Islamic Amal," an offshoot of the Amal Movement, and with radical religious scholars who studied at the holy cities of Qom in Iran and Najaf in Iraq.

Hezbollah was born in a gradual process under the auspices of the Pasdaran and launched from the Bekaa towards South Lebanon and Beirut's southern suburbs. It took part in limited clashes against Lebanon's Christian enclave in early 1982, and as the Israeli invasion destroyed the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) infrastructure in the South in June, Iran sent Hezbollah into the fray. Its first strikes were directed at the U.S. embassy and Marines, and French troops. Throughout the 1980s, Hezbollah took U.S. and European hostages and engaged in operations against Israeli forces and their local allies in the South Lebanon Army (SLA).

In 1990, Syria invaded East Beirut, seizing the central government and conferring a mantle of state legitimacy on Hezbollah. Iran consequently gained a third ally in the region, the Syrian-controlled Lebanese Republic. After a decade of attacks, including suicide bombings, the Iranian-funded organization won another victory when Israel withdrew from the security zone in southern Lebanon and the SLA was disbanded.

In May 2000, Hezbollah was poised along the international border with the "Zionist enemy." Through Lebanon's institutions, ports of entry, and security apparatus, Iran has expanded its base inside the country, obtained additional funding, and penetrated many countries around the world, from Africa to Latin America. In 2005, the organization intimidated members of Lebanon's Cedar Revolution, using terrorism to put down a democratic uprising against Khomeinist-Baathist domination.

Connection with Hamas

In the early 1990s, Iran finally connected with Hamas through Hezbollah. The hundreds of jihadists exiled by Israel into Lebanon were absorbed by the Khomeinist organization in various training camps. The encounter between Hezbollah (a Shia Islamist organization) and Hamas (an offshoot of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood) created the first hybrid of Sunni extremists acting in alliance with Shia fundamentalists. Iranian funding further strengthened Hamas.

The new strategic partnership gave Iran influence inside the Palestinian communities, particularly in Gaza. As a jihadist organization, Hamas rejects the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, as it does not recognize the existence of a Jewish state. Initially, its Muslim Brotherhood training and Wahhabi funding directed its efforts against the PLO negotiations with Israel, but when Hamas entered an alliance with Hezbollah and Iran, it became part of a regional axis commanded from Tehran, and thus became part of the ayatollahs' strategy to expand across the region and topple moderate Arab governments. Hamas's 2007 coup d'etat against the Palestinian Authority signaled that Hamas had become another Iranian tentacle in the region.

Iran's stooges in Iraq and Afghanistan
The Iranian plan for Iraq is nothing new. Since the first days of the 1979 revolution, Iranian intelligence fomented trouble in the Shia areas of Iraq. Its long-term goal would see the Shia majority in Iraq sympathetic to the regime in Tehran and provide a land bridge to Syria and Lebanon in the west – from Tehran to the Mediterranean Sea. With southern Iraq dominated by Iran, it would change the nature of the confrontation with Israel and threaten the oil-rich states of the Arabian Gulf.

The Shia Hizb al-Dawa of Iraq had struggled to establish an Islamist state in Mesopotamia since the 1960s. During the Iraq-Iran War, Khomeini planned to seize Basra and Iraq's southern provinces and declare an Islamic Republic there. After Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and was routed, thousands of Shi'ites fled to Iran, where they were trained by the Pasdaran. The Badr Brigade, Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, and other Iraqi factions were born in exile in Iran.

Mahdi Army in Basra (Nabil Al-Jurani)
Army and Khoneinists expand in Iraq
With the collapse of Iraq's ruling Baath party at the hands of the U.S.-led coalition in 2003, Iran began another secret invasion of Iraq, dispatching operatives, special forces and Hezbollah trainers throughout the Shia areas of the country. Iran penetrated most political parties with Islamist (Shia) inclination, and organized a bold pro-Khomeinist force: the Mahdi Army. Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah worked in unison to establish a "pro-axis" force inside Iraq.
In Afghanistan, Iran's strategists were undeterred by the presence of NATO troops after 2001. Despite the collapse of the Taliban regime that year, Tehran infiltrated Afghanistan's Shi'ite Hazara community in the center of the country and provided logistical support to the Taliban insurgency. Evidently the Iranian regime is interested in driving out the U.S.-led effort, weakening the Karzai government in Kabul, and carving out its own influence in the Central Asian country. And Tehran's reach in Afghanistan will only increase as Pakistan becomes increasingly unstable.
Infiltrating Arabia: Yemen, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf
Over the past few years, Tehran has widened its subversive activities in the Arabian Peninsula, quarreling with the Gulf Arab states of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. Although the UAE claims the island of Abu Musa as part of its sovereign territory, Iranian forces have occupied it, and reject calls to withdraw. Recent statements by Khomeinist clerics assert that Bahrain, too, is an Iranian possession under the name of Mishmahig Island, and it has triggered a severe diplomatic crisis with the small kingdom.
Behind these historical disputes lay greater geopolitical ambitions. Iran has been investing large amounts of oil money in the UAE with the aim of expanding its political and military influence in the Gulf. Iranian intelligence has also been expanding its cells and cadres in the large Shia community of Bahrain.
Houthis operated between Yemen and Saudi Arabia
In the majority - Sunni Yemen, the Pasdaran's networks have hooked up with the Houthis, who are waging an armed insurrection in the northern tip of the country. Yemeni President Ali Abdallah Saleh has accused Iran and Hezbollah of training the insurgents, who have battled government forces and attacked Saudi positions across the border. By 2009, the Khomeinists had practically established a military enclave in the southern corner of the Arabian Peninsula, threatening Saudi Arabia and its most sensitive province, the Hejaz, home to Islam's holiest shrines Mecca and Medina.
Targeting North Africa
Although North Africa has been home almost exclusively to Salafi jihadists, it has witnessed increased activity by Tehran's Shi'ite operatives. According to Moroccan authorities, Iran has funded religious institutions whose first mission is to convert Sunnis to Shia, in what is coined as "Tashyeeh." In 2009 and 2010, the Rabat government shut down a number of these entities and arrested people involved in them.
Moreover, Moroccan and Algerian opposition sources believe Iran is attempting to convince Algiers to proceed with cooperation agreements similar to the Iranian-Syrian treaties or the latest Syrian-Turkish accords. If this thrust were to bear fruit, the benefits for Tehran would be incalculable. Not only would the Khomeinists have a solid base south of the Mediterranean, but they would also gain a wide gate into the weak states of Central Africa and beyond.
Meanwhile, last year in Egypt, Hosni Mubarak's government accused Hezbollah of creating cells inside the country and planning attacks against Egyptian and Western targets. Egypt, the most populous and powerful Arab country with a Sunni majority, has been targeted significantly by Sunni Salafi terror networks. The new addition of Hezbollah cells acting on the inside dramatically raises the threat Egypt faces from jihadists.
Egyptian courts have sentenced a number of Lebanese Hezbollah members as well as Egyptian citizens working with them. From Beirut, Hezbollah's secretary general sent veiled threats to President Mubarak's government, claiming that Hezbollah and the "Islamic resistance" have the right to operate from any Arab and Islamic land against their enemies, principally Israel. Hassan Nasrallah had previously threatened Cairo when he exhorted the Egyptian military to rebel against its government.
But the Iranian strategy to build terror networks along the Nile Valley by way of Hezbollah has not been limited to Egypt. Sudan, whose regime has been both Islamist and jihadist since 1989, has undergone a rapprochement with Tehran. This convergence of interests between the elites of the two rogue states has only increased since the International Criminal Court indicted Sudanese dictator Omar al Bashir for the genocide in Darfur. In the weeks and months following the indictments, Hezbollah delegations followed by Iranian delegates supported Bashir against the West, and thus against the African uprisings in the south, west and east of the troubled country.
Iran's access to Sudan also brought strategic advantages to the Pasdaran: Hezbollah and Iranian intelligence benefit from the immense land mass by building military bases and training regime militias for potential confrontations to come. By linking up with Sudan, Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsors now have a host south of Egypt, where they can access the Red Sea via Port Sudan and use paths to Eritrea and Chad.
Facilities in East and West Africa
Towards the end of 2008 and 2009, intense contacts between Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's representatives and Eritrean officials culminated in the signing of an agreement granting Iran's navy facilities along the coasts of the Eritrea. This strategically significant development provided the Khomeinists with hundreds of miles of access in the Red Sea. While U.S. and allied naval forces deter Iran in the Persian Gulf, Iranian assets — though not as sophisticated as the Western forces in the region — can now operate in the Red Sea. Indeed, where the Iranian regime goes, Hezbollah follows. Israel is thus surrounded by Iranian proxies and the Horn of Africa is under the increasing risk posed by the axis of resistance.
Ahmedinijad in Eritrea

Hezbollah in West Africa
Iran has also worked to penetrate West Africa since the 1980s. Taking advantage of the substantial size of the Lebanese communities in Senegal, Liberia, Sierra Leone, the Ivory Coast, Benin, and Nigeria, Hezbollah has developed financial and intelligence networks that span the entire region. This increase of Iranian-backed activities in West Africa could have negative effects on security coordination between these countries and the West, including the U.S. and Europe.
Iran in Europe
Since the so-called "Islamic revolution," Iran has undertaken sinister intelligence activities throughout Europe, intimidating and occasionally assassinating opposition figures and dissidents. But Tehran's most dangerous presence in Europe comes in the form of active Hezbollah cells. Since 9/11, a number of European governments have detected Hezbollah activities on their soil. Indeed, Germany has arrested and tried members of the organization who were planning illegal activities.
Iran has extended its strategic reach into European countries, penetrating them with intelligence and terrorist networks, and weakening their resolve to join forces with the U.S. in sanctions or other punitive measures against Tehran.
Stretching into the Americas
Iran's longest arm stretches into Latin America. As of the early 1990s, Hezbollah had established a presence in the tri-border area between Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay. This lawless zone enables the Khomeinist network to develop illegal financial activities and train and plan for terrorist attacks in the region. The 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires and the 1994 bombing of a Jewish center there are prime examples of Tehran's terrorist activities and global reach.
Chavez with Khamanei
Ahmadinejad, Chavez
Chavez, Assad
With the rise of the Hugo Chavez regime, Iran's Latin American presence expanded even further. The Venezuelan strongman has signed several agreements with Ahmadinejad's regime, including an April 2009 defense treaty that provides for military and intelligence cooperation. Venezuela has granted Hezbollah operatives permission to organize their presence under the protection of Iran's Pasdaran and local intelligence, and according to U.S. Department of Defense reports, the Venezuelans are providing Iranian units with Spanish language instruction with the aim of inserting them in a Latin American context. One of the most dangerous aspects of Iran's presence in Venezuela is the increasing ability to install Iranian missiles aimed at the United States and other countries in the region.
As of now, Iran's reach within the United States is principally — but not entirely — in the hands of Hezbollah's networks, which have been trying to recruit new agents since they established their own foundations in Lebanon in the 1980s. Working naturally through Lebanese communities, beginning with its bases in the home country, Hezbollah established groups and cells inside the U.S. in states such as Michigan, New York and North Carolina. The main activities detected by U.S. law enforcement organizations have centered on smuggling, fundraising, and providing material support to the mother organization in Lebanon. But Hezbollah has gained valuable experience in penetrating Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq, Yemen and the countries of northern Africa, which enables Iran to do considerable damage to the U.S. in case of open conflict. American authorities have also been monitoring Iran's financial presence in the U.S., with recent discoveries showing Iranian front companies even holding assets in Manhattan.
Facilitators: Turkey's AKP and Qatar
Over the past few years, two additional Middle Eastern governments — supposedly close U.S. allies — have been aiding Iran in its attempts to emerge from international isolation. Since 2002, Turkey, led by the Islamic Justice and Development Party (AKP), has slowly become more supportive of Iran's policies, including Tehran's nuclear program. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently endorsed Ahmadinejad's controversial reelection despite the massive democratic opposition inside Iran. Ankara's Islamists also rejected UN sanctions over Iran's nuclear program.
Nasrallah, Assad, Ahmadinejad.

Erdogan.Ahmadinejad.
According to several Arab governments, Qatar, which has been funding the Al-Jazeera network since the late 1990s, has also made life easier for the Iranian regime in the region. Qatar's emir made diplomatic maneuvers to prevent the UN from implementing Security Council Resolution 1559, which provides for the disarming of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Instead, Qatar held a counter-conference in Doha in 2008 to help bring Hezbollah into the fold of the Lebanese government, at the expense of the democratic Cedar Revolution.
The Iranian Threat
The threat from Iran goes far beyond its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Its use of terrorist proxies and its creation of global terror networks has been one the longest-standing bones of contention with the West. Despite the current focus on the Taliban and al-Qaeda, no group has had more practice in global terrorism than Hezbollah, and no state has proved a better and more consistent patron than Iran.

From a U.S. counterterrorism perspective, the threats posed by Iran, Hezbollah, and its global terrorist network are considerable. But the addition of nuclear weapons into this global network of Khomeinists may well prove as dangerous if not more so than nuclear weapons in the hands of al-Qaeda.
Dr. Walid Phares is director of the Future of Terrorism Project at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He teaches global strategies at the National Defense University and is author of The Confrontation: Winning the War Against Future Jihad. 

This article was published in Vol IV, # 2 of the summer 2010 edition of In Focus Quarterly



Jewish Policy Center

Friday, September 17, 2010

Hamas Stuck Between Peace Talks and the IDF

By Yaakov Katz

THE TERROR GROUP HAS MADE A STRATEGIC DECISION TO INCREASE ATTACKS AGAINST ISRAEL, BUT IT DOESN'T WANT TO GO TOO FAR AND LEAD TO AN IDF GROUND OPERATION.

Hamas is on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand it has made a strategic decision to increase its terror attacks against Israel -- 10 rockets were fired into Israel on Wednesday -- in order to torpedo the peace talks between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

On the other hand, Hamas does not want to go too far with its attacks, to the point that Israel will feel compelled to send two IDF divisions into Gaza and carry out Operation Cast Lead II.

As a result, Hamas in recent weeks has allowed the jaljalat (Arabic for thunder) groups -- al-Qaida and global jihad proxies based in Gaza and made up mostly of former Hamas operatives -- to launch attacks into Israel.

While it has given these groups the green light for small operations, it is also restraining them and not allowing large attacks that could end in many casualties on the Israeli side and force the IDF back into Gaza.

Hamas's hope is that these attacks will torpedo the peace talks, although the meeting on Wednesday at the prime minister's official residence in Jerusalem between Netanyahu and Abbas is an indication that the terror group's efforts are not, for the moment, succeeding.

For the same reason, Hamas claimed responsibility for the shooting attack two weeks ago near Hebron that killed four Israelis, although the IDF is still not certain that Hamas was behind it.

There are, however, additional factors. Hamas in Gaza is torn between two camps. The first is the political echelon led by Ismail Haniyeh, which is believed to be more in favor of restraint because it fears a harsh Israeli response.

The second camp is led by Hamas's military wing Izzadin Kassam and its chief Ahmed Jabari, who is pushing to return to the days before Cast Lead, pre- December 2008, when it was firing dozens of rockets a day.

While Hamas's focus is on rebuilding damaged infrastructure and obtaining new longrange rockets, the military wing is genuinely frustrated with the restrictions placed on its freedom to attack Israel.

In contrast to the media, the IDF did not make a big deal Wednesday about the firing of at least two mortar shells containing phosphorus into Israel. Firstly, it is not the first time that phosphorus mortar shells were fired into Israel -- it happened during Cast Lead -- and secondly, the assessment within the Southern Command is that the group that fired the shells did not even know that they contained phosphorus.

As a matter of fact, phosphorus shells contain less explosives than regular ones and therefore create less shrapnel. On the other hand, they are highly flammable.

Israel, for its part, plans to continue with its current policy, which can be described as an "eye-for-an-eye."

On the one hand, Israel will strike back at Gaza, as it did Wednesday afternoon by bombing a terror tunnel in southern Gaza, but on the other hand, it will not, at this stage, launch a major operation on the ground inside Gaza.

This stems from intelligence assessments that the current wave of violence will run out following the Jewish holiday season in a little over a week. The belief is that Hamas is letting its operatives and proxies let off steam from a month of Ramadan when it did not really attack Israel at all.

The same intelligence assessments predict, though, that while this wave will soon end, it will not be the last and as the peace talks pick up speed and progress, so will the terrorism from Gaza.

Jerusalem Post

The 10 Highlighted Problems With the 'Muslim World'

1) DEHUMANIZATION
Apes and pigs, the dehumanization of non-Muslims, Christians as pigs and Jews as apes. (Or as some Islamic cleric called non-Muslims: "worms, snakes and maggots.

2) TERRORISM
Had the mainstream Islam really eject its radicals, the Jihadists wouldn't have the motivation to go on, Why else is there Islamic terrorism still active in so many parts of the world? The half-way condemnation, and almost always accompanied by a "but", but the west does this or that argument is still on - after 9 Years from the 9/11 Islamic massacre n 2001.

3) SHARIA: OPPRESSION AND ANNIHILATING THE INFIDEL
The campaign, hidden or open for implementation for Sharia law. In Sharia, besides the legal basis for the war against the infidel, women are subjugated, which explains how top Islamic cleric of Australia called non-Muslim women plain "meat."

4) HONOR KILLING
One of the great imports from the Islamic culture.

5) JIHAD & INTIMIDATIONS BY "MODERATES"
The so called moderate Muslim leaders that the best they can do is intimidate the west to give in to their Islamic expansion, or else... the radicals will be unleashed. The hidden Jihad.

6) SELF-MADE VICTIMHOOD
The wide sympathy and support in mainstream Islam to the Palestinian, Hezbollah, Taliban, tactics of using civilians (indirect murder of their own people) so that the west looks bad. (All of the above casualties are seen by mainstream Islam as nothing else but the 'victims of the west.')

7) ISLAMIC APARTHEID
With all the 'criticism" of the west, the Islamic world is still practicing Apartheid (in the real sense), religious and gender wise. The Christian minority has dwindled in Lebanon and among the Palestinian Arabs while Muslim population have increased, persecution.

8) WORLD DOMINATION - GOAL
The open or silent goal by Jihadists, yet backed by so many in mainstream Islam, towards a Caliphate - a theocratic Islamic dictatorship based on the Sharia (religious Islamic law).

9) A TOTALITARIAN WORLD
The Arab-Islamic world is totalitarian, even Lebanon that is supposedly the real democracy in that world, the terror Islamic group Hezbollah has immense power. (Iraq is yet to bee seen).

10) MOST CONFLICTS ALL OVER THE GLOBE IS BY MUSLIMS
Draw a map and point to the conflicts, then try to detach most of it from Muslims. Here's a partial list: Russia. Somalia. Sudan. Nigeria. Lebanon. Israel. Iraq. Afghanistan. Pakistan. India. Kashmir. Thailand. Philippines. China.



Free Public

More Quotes About "Palestine"

"There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".

- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".

- Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".

- Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
"The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".

"There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent (valley of Jezreel, Galilea); not for thirty miles in either direction... One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings. For the sort of solitude to make one dreary, come to Galilee... Nazareth is forlorn... Jericho lies a mouldering ruin... Bethlehem and Bethany, in their poverty and humiliation... untenanted by any living creature... A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds... a silent, mournful expanse... a desolation... We never saw a human being on the whole route... Hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil had almost deserted the country... Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes... desolate and unlovely...".

- Mark Twain, "The Innocents Abroad", 1867 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"In 1590 a 'simple English visitor' to Jerusalem wrote: 'Nothing there is to bescene but a little of the old walls, which is yet remayning and all the rest is grasse, mosse and weedes much like to a piece of rank or moist grounde'.".

- Gunner Edward Webbe, Palestine Exploration Fund,
Quarterly Statement, p. 86; de Haas, History, p. 338 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The land in Palestine is lacking in people to till its fertile soil".

- British archaeologist Thomas Shaw, mid-1700s -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Palestine is a ruined and desolate land".

- Count Constantine François Volney, XVIII century French author and historian -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The Arabs themselves cannot be considered but temporary residents. They pitched their tents in its grazing fields or built their places of refuge in its ruined cities. They created nothing in it. Since they were strangers to the land, they never became its masters. The desert wind that brought them hither could one day carry them away without their leaving behind them any sign of their passage through it".

- Comments by Christians concerning the Arabs in Palestine in the 1800s -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Then we entered the hill district, and our path lay through the clattering bed of an ancient stream, whose brawling waters have rolled away into the past, along with the fierce and turbulent race who once inhabited these savage hills. There may have been cultivation here two thousand years ago. The mountains, or huge stony mounds environing this rough path, have level ridges all the way up to their summits; on these parallel ledges there is still some verdure and soil: when water flowed here, and the country was thronged with that extraordinary population, which, according to the Sacred Histories, was crowded into the region, these mountain steps may have been gardens and vineyards, such as we see now thriving along the hills of the Rhine. Now the district is quite deserted, and you ride among what seem to be so many petrified waterfalls. We saw no animals moving among the stony brakes; scarcely even a dozen little birds in the whole course of the ride".

- William Thackeray in "From Jaffa To Jerusalem", 1844 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is of a body of population".

- James Finn, British Consul in 1857 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The area was underpopulated and remained economically stagnant until the arrival of the first Zionist pioneers in the 1880's, who came to rebuild the Jewish land. The country had remained "The Holy Land" in the religious and historic consciousness of mankind, which associated it with the Bible and the history of the Jewish people. Jewish development of the country also attracted large numbers of other immigrants - both Jewish and Arab. The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track suitable for transport by camels and carts... Houses were all of mud. No windows were anywhere to be seen... The plows used were of wood... The yields were very poor... The sanitary conditions in the village [Yabna] were horrible... Schools did not exist... The rate of infant mortality was very high... The western part, toward the sea, was almost a desert... The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many ruins of villages were scattered over the area, as owing to the prevalence of malaria, many villages were deserted by their inhabitants".

- The report of the British Royal Commission, 1913 -

You might also like:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

My Videos Bars

Israel & Judaism Islam & Terrorism