The most American holiday of the year is coming up. Thanksgiving. A touching event unlike any other I know of, just a meal and simple thankfulness for the good things in life. Wrapped up in the oppressive lie that is American history, of course. I was just discussing some of our quaint customs in an email exchange with my Dutch pal Michael van der Galien. Hes in an American Studies program in Rotterdam or Amsterdam or some other dam place,* so I suggested he get a bunch of his clog-wearing dike-plugging buddies to stage a real American Thanksgiving. Sort of like World War II GI re-enacting or cowboy dressup, both popular among the Euros.
Because, you know, even though they like to give us a hard time, they actually love us and want to be like us. So heres the deal. . . .
Go read it all.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/19/2007 12:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
One would like to think that all this is true, but I think we're seeing the return of Kremlinology.
MOSCOW: President Vladimir Putin's government has failed to reverse a steady post-Soviet decline of the armed forces despite repeated pledges to strengthen military might, a group of independent experts said in a report released Tuesday. The military continues to suffer from rampant corruption, inefficiency and poor morale, the report said. The Kremlin has also failed to deliver on its promises to modernize arsenals, it said.
Putin owes his broad popularity to an oil-fueled economic boom that has helped increase wages and pensions, as well as efforts to revive Russia's clout. But critics say that the Russian military is only a shadow of the Soviet Army and that bellicose statements from the Kremlin mask a steady decline of its potential.
"The revival of Russia's military might under Putin is merely a myth," Stanislav Belkovsky, who head the Institute for National Strategy, said at a presentation of the report. "The Russian armed forces have degraded completely under Putin."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/19/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
SW: One would like to think that all this is true, but I think we're seeing the return of Kremlinology.
Kremlinology is typically conducted in the West. These are, I believe, Russian think tanks. That's why the people quoted are cited as critics. From the standpoint of American interests, a weak Russia isn't necessarily a bad thing.
#3
If Russia pumps oil, it is good for America. If Russia wants to reassemble its empire, it's bad for America. There is little else in Russia that matters to America, I suspect.
#4
They can't afford what they have. When internal troops like the border guards and MVD (light infantry to motorized infantry) are counted, Russia had larger armed forces than the USA and 3 times the reserves with less than half the population and $0.75 trillion GDP ($2.0T PPP) vs USA's $13.5T. Even what remains of their economy will collapse when the developed world moves away from oil. Let's just hope the next US administration does a better (or any) job than the current one in this regard.
Posted by: ed ||
11/19/2007 8:31 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Yes, yes, I can see them dumping oil derived moneys into their armed forces to get them back to the prime level they were when or just before they rode into Afghanistan. All the oil revenue in the world can't buy you the best army otherwise the Arabs would have been sweeping through their side of the world long before now. It take competent loyal incorruptible officers and especially non-commissioned officers to make an effective military. That is a derivative of culture not industrial base. So Puty can spend his nations wealth on all the kings horse and all the kings men, but he's not going to put together anything more than something to awe the civilian protesters.
#6
The corruption is the big thing. This was small during communism, but has exploded since then. It all comes down to training. Most Russian soldiers are given the briefest familiarization with their weapons and don't do much with them after. Pilots don't fly much, tankers don't drive and shoot much, artillery doesn't fire much, and soldiers don't shoot and maneuver much. You can have the best military toys in the world and if you don't know how to use them well, a lesser armed force with high degrees of training and motivation will wipe the floor with you (see Israel vs Arabs Six day war and Yom Kippor).
#7
It's worth recalling the old saw that an army of lambs lead by a lion will always prevail over an army of lions lead by a lamb. Russia seems to have plenty of lions available, but the combined tsarist/communist legacy has left a culture incapable of organization. At the philosophical level it is an ongoing failure to recognize the efficiency of markets while continually choosing crudely concentrated individual command and control.
Better quit before I start sounding like Joseph M. - he could finish this analysis.
#8
The military continues to suffer from rampant corruption, inefficiency and poor morale, the report said. The Kremlin has also failed to deliver on its promises to modernize arsenals, it said.
Corruption can derail just about anything of importance to a nation. A quick look at the MME (Muslim Middle East) serves up proof of that. It is especially damaging in the procurement of weapons and equipment that must be highly reliable and are mission critical. The biggie is when it comes to upkeep and replacement of Russia's aging nuclear arsenal. These puppies are the military's fussy little purebreds and they require a lot of expensive maintenance to keep in working order.
Modernizing land forces, laying keels for a blue water navy and keeping the showroom shine on your nukes is a damnably expensive proposition, even without corruption riding on your back like a bloodtick. Factor in Russia's endemic corruption and their chances of raising a highly functional, well-equipped and modernized military are near-zilch.
All the oil revenue in the world can't buy you the best army otherwise the Arabs would have been sweeping through their side of the world long before now. It take competent loyal incorruptible officers and especially non-commissioned officers to make an effective military. That is a derivative of culture not industrial base.
This is the bottom line, per a military mindset, and something that has been utterly elusive for Soviets and modern Russians alike.
The corruption is the big thing. This was small during communism, but has exploded since then.
I disagree in that corruption has always been rampant, the only difference being that during the Soviet era it was done in the name of the state. As I always say when people wonder why Russia has descended into such gangsterism, "They just took off their uniforms". All the other apparatus for graft and bribery remains in place and functions sickeningly well.
#9
"Corruption ... was small during/under communism" > no, "corruption" was hidden or covert. Under Soviet Communism, Govt. was Producer, Consumer, and Deciding Arbiter-Intermediary - BY THIS SCOPE, THE GOVERNMENT = CCCP WAS ROUGHLY THE MAFIA-UNDERWORLD/BLACK MARKET AS WELL.
#11
Meant to add that Putin's popularity is due in good part to the perception that he himself is not corrupt/venal and that he took on the corrupt apparachniks and capitalists who flourished in the chaos after the fall.
#12
As I recall from Odom's book, there was plenty of corruption in the Soviet Army at the NCO level in terms of extortion from conscripts, at very senior levels in the normal nomenklatura mode, with the mid-level officers behaving to get on the senior officer gravy train. The soviet system was not some non-corrupt system in which all were honest, or else it would have worked better. The biggest change has probably been a substitution of conspicuous transparent corruption for violent/penal means of coercion and lying to the center about production and quality. Decide for yourself if you consider that less corrupt.
#14
It helps to have the media understand that if they fail to present the news "fairly" you are willing to revert to more primitive methods to influence public opinion.
Germany presents a tempting target for the jihadists and others
By Mark Helprin
Though no longer the chief delinquent of Europe, and though not much thought is given to its strategic position, Germany is still Europe's center of gravity, territorially contiguous to more nations than any state other than Russia, with compact interior lines of communication, Western Europe's largest population, and Europe's leading economy.
Facts like these assert themselves through every kind of historical fluctuation, even if America now sees Germany, the way stop for airlifters en route to Iraq and Afghanistan, as a kind of giant aircraft carrier with sausages. But Germany is no doubt the subject of far deeper consideration on the one hand by Russia and on the other by Jihadists.
The line from Paris to Moscow, which has been traveled from west to east by the French, east to west by the Russians, and in both directions by the Germans, is a road that invariably attracts continental powers on the brink of military predominance whether in fact or the imagination. During the Cold War it was responsibly fortified and blocked, but no longer. Whereas in 1989 we kept in Europe 325,000 troops, 5,000 tanks, 25 operating air bases, and 1,000 combat aircraft, we now keep approximately a fifth of that. Whereas the Germans in 1989 could field a half-million men and 5,000 tanks, they now can deploy less than half that number.
As the Soviet Union dissolved, much of its military capacity followed it into oblivion. But as Western Europe dismantles its militaries, Russia builds, encouraged as much by European pacifism as by the Russian view of America's struggle in Iraq as a parallel to the Soviet's fatal involvement in Afghanistan. Like Germany between the wars, Russia is now eager and determined to reconstitute its forces, and with its new-found oil wealth, it is doing so.
How fortuitous for it, then, that the United States is expending military capital without replenishment, and Europe has spiritually resigned from its own defense, with Germany, for example, now devoting only 1.4% of its GDP to the task. Having been deeply humiliated in recent years, Russia is sure to seek redress if not in action then at least in the power to act. Nations behave this way, it has always been so, and as the balance of power in Europe and the world is shifting, Germany, the strategic gate to Western Europe and by its nature and position that which stabilizes or disrupts the continent, sleeps and dreams unaware.
Germany must fascinate the Jihadists, too--not for displacing America as the prime target, but as the richest target least defended. Though it will never happen, they believe that Islam will conquer the world, and so they try. Unlike the U.S., Europe is not removed from them by an ocean, and in it are 50 million of their co-religionists among whom they can disappear and find support. Perhaps out of habit, Europe is also kind to mass murderers, who if caught spend a few years in a comfortable prison sharpening their resolve before they are released to fight again. In July the French sentenced eight terrorists connected to the murder of 45 people to terms ranging from one year, suspended, to 10 years. In Spain, with 191 dead and 1,800 wounded, the perpetrators will spend no more than 40 years behind soft bars. Though in 2003 Germany found a September 11th facilitator guilty of 3,066 counts of accessory to murder and sentenced him to seven years (20 hours per person), he was recently reconvicted and sentenced to 43 hours per person, not counting parole.
But, more importantly, the variations in European attitudes and capabilities vis-à-vis responding to terrorism or nuclear blackmail are what make Germany such an attractive target. Unlike the U.S., France, and Britain, Germany is a major country with no independent expeditionary capability and no nuclear weapons, making it ideal for a terrorist nuclear strike or Iranian extortion if Iran is able to continue a very transparent nuclear policy to its logical conclusion. Though it is conceivable that after the shock of losing Washington or Chicago, the U.S.--or Britain after Birmingham, France after Lyon--would, even without an address certain, release a second strike, it is very unlikely that, even with an address certain, any nuclear power would launch in behalf of another nation, NATO ally or not, absent an explicit arrangement such as the dual-key structure during the Cold War.
Looking at Germany, then, Iran sees a country with nothing to counter the pressure of merely an implied nuclear threat. Jihadists see the lynchpin of Europe, easy of access and inadvertently hospitable to operations, that will hardly punish those who fall into its hands, and that can neither accomplish on its own a flexible expeditionary response against a hostile base or sponsor, nor reply to a nuclear strike in kind. Thus the German government should be especially nervous about cargos trucked overland from the east.
What might be done? NATO could abandon the mistaken belief that Europe, having seen the end of history and the end of war, will always be in the clear. It could publicly make known to Russia that, for the purpose of maintaining the balance of power necessary to keep the gate to Western Europe closed and the prospects of war dim, it will judiciously and proportionally match Russian military expansion.
For its own protection, and thus that of Europe, Germany could more closely integrate and where appropriate reintegrate itself into the expeditionary and nuclear retaliatory structures of the U.S., Britain, and France without moving nuclear weapons forward to German soil; end leniency for terrorists; step up defensive measures as if it is just about to be hit; and embrace limited missile defense against potentially nuclear-armed Iranian intermediate-range ballistic missiles rather than accept the Russian thesis that 10 interceptors will perturb the nuclear equation.
What are the chances of this? Though the West comprises the richest grouping of nations the world has ever seen, it has somehow come to believe not only that it is not entitled to its customary defenses but that it cannot afford them. And looking ahead strategically so as to outmaneuver crisis and war has, unfortunately, long been out of fashion.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/19/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What a crock of sh*t. Where's the EU in all this? There ain't no "Germany" no more.
#2
Though it is conceivable that after the shock of losing Washington or Chicago, the U.S.--or Britain after Birmingham, France after Lyon--would, even without an address certain, release a second strike, it is very unlikely that, even with an address certain, any nuclear power would launch in behalf of another nation, NATO ally or not, absent an explicit arrangement such as the dual-key structure during the Cold War.
This ought to change. While certainly a delicate arrangement at best, there needs to be a clear message riot act read out to Islam. Namely, how a single terrorist nuclear strike anywhere in the West or Israel buys all of them an E Ticket ride straight to Hell.
Although such unanimity is sorely wanting at present, cracks are beginning to appear in Europe's nescient façade. With Sarkozy militating against Iran's nuclear adventurism there can now be some justifiable hope that the Europeans will finally begin to understand the threat they face. Even the slightest comprehension thereof should be sufficient to awaken them to the need for a renewed NATO policy ofas Bush himself described the 9-11 atrocity in his address to a joint session of congress on September 20, 2001"An [atomic] attack on one, is an attack on all", with devastating retaliation being the bottom line.
#3
Judging by some recent conversation, I would say the West lacks the stomach to use nuclear weapons under any circumstances. I include a direct attack by, for example, Iran on a city in the continental United States. Let alone, say, Britain retaliating on behalf of Belgium.
#4
I include a direct attack by, for example, Iran on a city in the continental United States.
However grim it might sound, I'd like to think that our military would have the courage to mutiny and set about retaliating against Iran with a massive nuclear bombardment. Any Commander in Chief so spineless as to not answer such an atrocity would be guilty of both malfeasance and treason. I'd also like to think that the majority of American people would take to the streets in support of any officers who had authorized such a response.
#5
CASPIAN SEA SUMMIT > RUSSIA - basically, + formally, any attack by the US [NATO] on Iran IS AN ATTACK ON RUSSIA. Saddam-era PUTIN DOCTRINE > argues that THE POST-9-11 USA WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO SOLELY CONTROL + DOMINATE THE WORLD'S OIL SUPPLIES.
The big news out of the most recent Democratic presidential debate was that two of the leading Democratic candidates, Senator Clinton and Senator Obama, endorsed the Bush Doctrine that is at the core of our current president's foreign policy. We haven't seen it reported anywhere else, but it's a big story.
Here's what Mrs. Clinton said: "There's absolutely a connection between a democratic regime and heightened security for the United States." Here's what Mr. Obama said: "The more we see repression, the more there are no outlets for how people can express themselves and their aspirations, the worse off we're going to be, and the more anti-American sentiment there's going to be in the Middle East."
Or, as President Bush has put it in enunciating what has come to be known as the Bush Doctrine: "For decades, free nations tolerated oppression in the Middle East for the sake of stability. In practice, this approach brought little stability and much oppression, so I have changed this policy."
Or, as he put it again, "Some who call themselves realists question whether the spread of democracy in the Middle East should be any concern of ours. But the realists in this case have lost contact with a fundamental reality: America has always been less secure when freedom is in retreat; America is always more secure when freedom is on the march."
Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama spoke their share of silliness during the debate, and they lost no opportunity to criticize the president. But the comments they made about the connection between freedom, democracy, and American national security are a reminder though it may be fashionable to talk about how divided America is, there is a broad consensus on certain key principles, a consensus that extends from Mr. Bush on the right to Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton on the left.
It's fashionable, too, these days, to disparage Mr. Bush. But when historians assess the successes of his presidency, the far-sighted among them will surely count as one of his signal accomplishments that he shifted the debate on freedom and democracy and security in the Middle East so decisively that even his political opponents were conducting their debate on his terms. It is one of the president's great contributions, not only to American security but to human liberty.
#1
Yet another reason amongst Net-Media many why MOUD + RADICAL ISLAM can no longer count on anti-Dubya/GOP, ant-US US Politicos-Globalists now or for after Jan 2009.
#2
Does that explain why we have to prop up Musharraf to keep the keys to the nukes out of the hands of Red Mosque types?
Idealistically pushing liberty sounds much better than accepting realpolitik solutions. That is, until you see how it installed Hitler, Putin, Achmadinejad, and Hugo Chavez.
In 1864 Americans were fed up with the Civil War, in which there were days on which more soldiers were killed than have died in four years of the Iraq war. "Mr. Lincoln is already beaten," wrote Horace Greeley, perhaps the leading journalist.
But on September 1 the news reached Washington that Atlanta had fallen to the Union army, and on election day it appeared as if the North was on the way to victory. Lincoln was decisively reelected. And, according to historian Allan Nevins, "The damage done to the Democratic Party by the platform could not be undone. Its stigmatization of the heroic war effort as worthless gave the Northern millions an image of the Democratic Party they could never forget .and would cost the party votes for a generation."
FOR WELL over a year now most prominent Democrats have insisted that the Iraq war had been lost and that the US should get its troops home as quickly as possible. It was true that the US was losing the war in 2006. Two responses were possible. The Democrats response was, in effect, "the war is hopeless, we should give up." The administration response was, "we have to do something different so that we can win."
Most voters prefer the second response - especially when it is successful.
In November 2008 it is likely to be clear that if the US had followed the Democrats' advice the US would have suffered an unnecessary defeat. Those voters who believe that the US is facing dangerous threats from jihadis may well feel that it is not safe to bring to power the party that would have brought defeat in Iraq.
#2
By 2008, the MSM will have either induced a substantial portion of the elctorate to "move on" (ie forget everything the Democrats said) or they'll have figured out a way to give the Dems all the credit for the victory.
#4
LINCOLN [paraph] > "When will our Generals learn that the entire country is our soil". IMO, like many other Union Generals early in the Civil War, despite his loyalty to the North "Mac" was NOT anti-Secessionist as per the wording of the US Constitution. Prior to the advent of Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan [North's later Triumvirate/"Destroyer Generals"] Mac was the only top Union Cdr to defeat or stop Confederate forces in battle, including Robert E. Lee. IMO, Mac's prob was NOT personal or professional incompetence, as many in the Army of the Potomac + South feared or respected his abilities, but a personal, totalitarian unwillingness to fight other Amers = Confederates despite his own belief in Union + Lincoln's/Political Washington's formal policies in favor of war + restoring the Union, + despite two de facto Southern invasions of the North. However naive or discretionary Mac was, I believe Mac should be respected by Amers for his deep personal unwillingness to fight = kill his own people.
DOUGLAS MACARTHUR > NO ONE HATES WAR MORE THAN THE SOLDIER.
After having received a share of email, comments, and Google News alerts, on the matter of sending Christmas cards to Walter Reed Army Medical Center I have decided that a posted needed to be dedicated purely to the matter in question.
The easy answer is simply, DO NOT SEND ANY SOLDIER/WOUNDED WARRIOR/RECOVERING SOLDIER/AMERICAN HERO MAIL TO WALTER REED.
It will not be received. There are many reasons. One being that there is a 2001 regulation saying that it cannot be done. It also says that the mail will not be accepted, but there is a larger problem than that. And unfortunately it is a logistical one.
The contractor that handles the mail simply cannot (have not) been able to keep up with the volume of mail that is received for this type of parcel. Last holiday season there were nearly 1 millions pieces of mail to Wounded Warriors here at Walter Reed alone. Imagine huge mail carts, holding thousands and thousands of letters. Now imagine cart after cart of this mail clogging the storage rooms and hallways. Now the horrible part imagine that mail being sorted, processed, and returned by the very Soldiers that the mail was intended for.
Due to the volume of mail, and shortage of contract employees, last holiday season Wounded Warriors from Med Hold and Holdover were tasked in assisting in the return of these cards. From 0800 until 1500 every weekday 6-12 Soldiers worked in sorting these cards. First, by whether or not they had return addresses. If they did not they (assumingly) were returned to the mail postal facility and destroyed. If the parcles did have a return . thats when the work began.
The Walter Reed zip code was lined through first and then the barcodes. Next it was stamped return to sender, addressee not known and refused. From there a card from the post commander describing why the mail could not be received and an alternative to supporting the Soldiers was hand addressed. The endacted letters were then separated, bundled (if you sent more than one), and returned to sender along with the hand addressed card.
Progress was shown by the number of hand addressed cards that had been completed in a day, normally in the hundreds. Needless to say, that is a small dent in a very large pile of mail. This operation went on from November until March when the Walter Reed Scandal story broke in the Washington Post. The operation was then downscaled and delegated to a smaller number of Soldiers. For all that I know mail from last year is still being returned.
So in conclusion, this holiday season do not send Any Soldier mail to Walter Reed. Find a particular Soldier at Walter Reed and write them; or even better find a local veteran or VFW and write them. Show them your support. While there are a few of us here, there are many more veterans in your local community that need your support during this holiday season. It would mean the world to them.
And to me, that I would not have to return one more Christmas card to you.
#1
Last holiday season there were nearly 1 millions pieces of mail to Wounded Warriors here at Walter Reed alone. Imagine huge mail carts, holding thousands and thousands of letters.
Meanwhile, the ugly self loathing people who pass themselves off as Americans, aka lefties, will enjoy a very dark and lonely holiday in which they will be stuck with those of similar sulking lifestyles, self centered and devoid of light. Couldn't be a nicer season to know that regardless of the hate and loathing on campuses and around Hollyweird, people by the thousands, the common people, the yeoman of this nation extend their heart and faith in those willing to give all for not just their fellow countrymen but also those not of their circle and community who've for generations are just emerging from the darkness of tyranny. Those who've not fully mortgaged their souls in their obstruction of liberation of their fellow man, must either escape from our rational universe or feel the deep hollow emptiness so personified by Scrooge himself before Christmas. Cheers!
Speaking as a misfit unassimilated foreigner, I think of Thanksgiving as the most American of holidays. . . .
Well, Americans have a lot to be thankful for. Europeans think of this country as the New World in part because it has an eternal newness which is noisy and distracting. Who would ever have thought you could have ready-to-eat pizza faxed directly to your iPod? And just when you think youre on top of the general trend of novelty, it veers off in an entirely different direction: Continentals who grew up on Hollywood movies where the guy tells the waitress Gimme a cuppa joe and slides over a nickel return to New York a year or two later and find the coffee now costs $5.75, takes 25 minutes and requires an agonizing choice between the cinnamon-gingerbread-persimmon latte with coxcomb sprinkles and the decaf venti pepperoni-Eurasian-milfoil macchiato. Who would have foreseen that the nation that inflicted fast food and drive-thru restaurants on the planet would then take the fastest menu item of all and turn it into a kabuki-paced performance art? What mad genius!
But Americans arent novelty junkies on the important things. The New World is one of the oldest settled constitutional democracies on earth, to a degree the Old World can barely comprehend. Where it counts, Americans are traditionalists. We know Eastern Europe was a totalitarian prison until the Nineties, but we forget that Mediterranean Europe (Greece, Spain, Portugal) has democratic roots going all the way back until, oh, the mid-Seventies; France and Germanys constitutions date back barely half a century, Italys only to the 1940s, and Belgiums goes back about 20 minutes, and currently its not clear whether even that latest rewrite remains operative. The U.S. Constitution is not only older than Frances, Germanys, Italys or Spains constitution, its older than all of them put together. Americans think of Europe as Goethe and Mozart and 12th century castles and 6th century churches, but the Continents governing mechanisms are no more ancient than the Partridge Family. Aside from the Anglophone democracies, most of the wests nation states have been conspicuous failures at sustaining peaceful political evolution from one generation to the next, which is why theyre so susceptible to the siren song of Big Ideas Communism, Fascism, European Union. If youre going to be novelty-crazed, better the zebra-mussel cappuccino than the Third Reich. . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
11/19/2007 12:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Stan Kurtz cuts through the wild and woolly rhetoric about the possibilities of democracy in Pakistan.
Pakistan...compared to what? That is the question lurking beneath our struggle to make sense of unfolding events in this troubled country. In their minds eye, many commentators hold onto the hopeful image of a democratic Pakistan, unified by a cross-party consensus against the Islamists, fully engaged in the war on terror. If that vision is what youre comparing to the current mess, youll be highly critical of General Musharraf. By imposing a state of emergency, jailing political opponents, and shutting down independent media, Musharraf would seem to have weakened and isolated himself, undermined chances for a democratically forged antiterrorist consensus, and even pushed his democratic opponents together with the Islamists into some sort of united opposition.
But what if the image of a democratic and antiterrorist Pakistan is a pipedream? What if the Pakistani people as a whole do not support the war on terror and even admire the jihadists? What if the real alternative to the present mess is the catastrophe of a fractured and warring army, nuclear materials finding their way to Osama bin Laden, or even a full-scale Islamist takeover? If thats what youre comparing to the current mess, youll be inclined to think we have little choice but to support Musharraf, even as we help patch up a fractured political situation as best we can.
#2
Sounds like a fine nominee for the Julius Streicher Editorial Cartoonist Award, who's previous winners include the American transnational progressive Ted Rall.
#3
Candidate for the Joseph Goebbels anti-Semite propaganda award. So when can we expect the Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Catholics to riot over this in Muslim neighborhoods? Torching of cars in 10, 9, 8, 7,...
It was thirty years ago today that the then Egyptian president Anwar Sadat first visited Israel, publicly launching a diplomatic process that led to the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty. At present, though, Egypt is the Arab worlds biggest center of publishing anti-Semitic literature. So says a new report by the Tel Aviv-based Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center.
This literature that Egypt puts out, says the Center, is marketed across the Arab and Muslim world, distributed through the Internet, and sold every year at the Cairo International Book Fair. The Egyptian government, despite its ability to impose strict censorship, allows all this to go on.
Seven of these books were purchased, apparently by someone from the Center, at the Cairo fair that was held this year from January 24 to February 4. The books, published in Cairo over the past four years, recycle lies, fabrications, and anti-Semitic myths rooted in classical European and Islamic anti-Semitism.
First theres The Nature of the Jews [as reflected] in the Torah and the Talmud by Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Hijazi al-Saqa. The front cover sets the tone: a ship called World Zionism is sailing the globe while Jewish snakes crawl over the various continents (the back cover is even more grisly). The author holds a PhD in comparative religious research from Al-Azhar University, considered the leading center of Islamic and Arabic learning in the world.
The book begins by explaining that the Jews hate the Muslims and hate all the peoples and nations, since the Devil has whispered in their ears saying they are the smart and the clever, while others are unclean beasts. A later, typical passage states: Almost all the revolutions, coups détat, and wars that ever happened in the world were brought about by the Jews, instructed by the falsified Torah, the Talmud, and ultimately The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. [These texts] all incite [the Jews] to eliminate non-Jews, using all means to achieve their goal: ruling the world from Jerusalem .
Then theres Israels Follies and the Lies of Zionism: Religion and State by Ibrahim Abu Dah, who heads the Egyptian oppositionist newspaper Al-Siyasi al-Misri. This time the front-cover snakes, instead of crawling all over the globe, emerge from a Star of David containing pictures of Zionist, Israeli, and Jewish notables.
The Talmud, says Abu Dah, tells Jews that all the resources of the Earth belong solely to them, to be seized by them while freely killing any and all non-Jews. Abu Dah, though, provides hope: he sees signs in the Koran and even in Jewish holy books that the demise of the state of Israel is near.
The same Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Hijazi al-Saqa has also offered another of the many Arabic editions of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. This ones front cover varies the zoological content, showing, instead of Jewish snakes (an omnipresent image in the Arab world), a Jewish octopus enwrapping the Earth with its tentacles. The back cover informs readers that the entire contents [of the Protocols] appear in the Talmud, written by the Jews themselves and our sole motive for publishing them is to warn the world about the Jewish threat.
Muhammad Younes Hashems The Jews and the New Crusaders: The Religious and Political Controversy targets not only Jews but also Christians and the West. The author, a researcher, contends that the Jews control the Western countries and have formed an anti-Islamic alliance with Christian imperialism.
Publisher Dr. Huda al-Koumi, who holds a PhD in dramaturgy, explains in her Foreword that the Jews keep using the most despicable weapons in conflicts with their enemies. They use women, sex, drugs, bribes, forgery, schemes, and mix drugs into food, beverages, agricultural farms, water, and anything [else]. Chemtrails!
The cover of Dr. Baha al-Amirs The Divine Inspiration and Its Reversal, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion shows Orthodox Jews praying in a sinister blood-red light. The back cover informs readers that The Protocols is the centuries-old scheme of the Jews, implemented for hundreds of years. It is transmitted by the snakes head from generation to generation and has led to the downfall of one nation after another since the 5th century BC. The books text often invokes the Koran in making the case that the Jews seek to corrupt the whole world.
The Children of Israel and the Lie of Semitism was written by Dr. Ayid Taha Nassef, chief of the Information Center for National and Strategic Studies and Research in Egypt. The cover shows a Star of David superimposed on a hapless globe, and the textamong, of course, many other thingssays that the recent [persecutions] against the Jews in Germany were carried out by Hitler, who burned thousands of them in mass incinerators due to their despicable acts.
Finally theres Secrets of the Bastions of the False Messiah in the Hidden Island Triangle: The Wandering Jew and the Bermuda [Triangle] Region. This work is by Muhammad Issa Daoud, a famous, bestselling author in the Arab world. The book develops the thesis that the Bermuda Triangle is home to Al-Masikh al-Dajjal, known in Muslim tradition as a repulsive false messiah of the Jews who will fight the Mahdi at the end of time. Author Daoud contends that in the 1990s Israel and the United States shot down Egyptian planes in the Bermuda Triangle and that the Zionist- and American-dominated world media covered up the crimes. Now, you've got to admit this one IS inventive.
The lurid and insane fantasies that fill these books are genocidal in import. Both stemming from and feeding a frenzy of hatred, they hammer home again and again the message to millions of Arab and Muslim readers that Jews and the state of Israel are the source of all evil. As the Center notes, the anti-Semitic myths, lies, and drivel take hold in the consciousness of those exposed to such literature . . . and lay the foundations for acts of violence against [Jews].
That Egypt is the fountainhead of this toxicity does not prevent it from receiving large annual outlays of U.S. aid and being assiduously courted by both the U.S. and Israeli governments as an agent of peace. Ignoring the real nature of the Egyptian regime and society is both cowardly and a betrayal of the Jewish and other victims of hatred.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
