Turkey would make all out attempts to regain the Vilayet of Mosul which they lost out to the British Mandated and newly created country of Iraq after World War 1.

In response to the Askariya Mosque while Jalal Talebani, the Kurdish President of Iraq has also called for peace between the Shiites and Sunnis of Iraq, he would be keeping an eye on when he needs to retire to Mosul, the future capital of Kurdistan away from the mayhem in a country of which he ironically is the President of.

Iraq would soon see increasingly provocative attacks by the Al Qaeda in Iraq on Shiite sites. Al Qaeda may destroy the Shiite shrines at Karbala and Najaf, as the attack on Karbala has ominously indicated today just a couple of days after the Al Askariya attack. So even if the Shiites keep their cool in spite of the very provocative attack on the Al Askariya, the Al Qaeda will not let them rest till they take on the Sunnis, plunging Iraq in to a civil war.

The Al Qaeda has everything to gain with an Iraq convulsed in to a civil war, as that would prove the American liberation to have been a dismal failure. But more importantly, the Al Qaeda would keep getting recruits from the Sunnis across the Islamic crescent through Iraq being kept on the boil. That is why Al Zarqawi, the Al Qaeda thug in Iraq has pledged to wipe off all Shiites. It is going to be a difficult time for Shiites, as he would keep pinching the Shiite bottom, till they blow off their top - finally but reluctantly!

And so Iraq would eventually be divided between the rebellious Sunni triangle of Iraq, an area that will fall under the influence of the Syrians; and its increasingly turbulent Shiite south, an area that will be used by the Iranians to keep Iraq on the boil to stave off American action against Iran; and also the relatively stable Kurdish north, the area coveted by the Turks.

If you're a Kurdish leader in northern Iraq watching the mess unfolding in the rest of the country, the questions increasingly running through your mind would be: How long before we Kurds give up on a united Iraq and choose independence?

Why would the Kurds want to stay part of Iraq and risk being drawn into the out-of-control maelstrom overtaking the rest of the country?

And if Kurds break away from Iraq, that would enrage Turkey, which fears that an independent Iraqi Kurdish state would attract its own 12 million to 14 million Kurds. Iraq's fragmentation also would prove that Washington's vision of a united and democratic Iraq was a pipe dream. A restive Turkish Kurdistan, could strengthen Islamist forces in Turkey, destabilizing Turkish Democracy and weakening the secular traditions of Kemal Ataturk, pulling Turkey even further from the possibility of EU membership, giving rise to the demand for an Islamist Turkey, if not, hopefully, for a revival of the Khilafat (Caliphate) abolished by Kemal Ataturk in 1920. A Turkish civil war on the lines of what happened in Algeria cannot be ruled out entirely.

Coming back to Iraq, for the Kurds of Iraq, after decades of torture, mass executions, forced relocation and chemical attacks by Saddam Hussein's monstrous regime, the Kurds today have a chance to chart their destiny. So far, they have followed the American script. But today there are three possibilities:

- an Iraq convulsed by violence for years to come;
- a Shiite-dominated Iraq; or
- an Iraq that fragments.

The first possibility could unleash Islamist forces in Saudi Arabia (and also in the Gulf countries, Yemen, Egypt, Libya), inviting greater American involvement for stabilizing the Saudi regime with limited intervention in Egypt and elsewhere.

The second possibility of a Shiite-dominated Iraq, would strengthen Iran, inviting an American pre-emptive strike on Iran by the Fall of this year leading to further convulsions in the wider Islamic world, especially in Pakistan.

The third possibility of an Iraq that fragments, is equally perilous, since it would destabilize Turkey. The increasing upheaval we see today makes it increasingly necessary to contemplate all the three possibilities; all of which translate to one eventuality – a Middle East in ferment. And to be buried in this chaos will be the rubble of our blueprint for a democratic Iraq that was to transform the Middle East's landscape into a benign zone of Jeffersonian democracy.

___________________________________

With Codi, Bolton, Wolf on the job… will Falwell, Armold, Boykin and Pat follow?

President Bush deserves to be congratulated on his announcing Paul Wolfowitz, the hardline Neocon who led the “attack Iraq” campaign, as the US nominee to be the head of the World Bank The President is following a trend in having hardliners in key positions. First was Condoleezza Rice the hawkish nominee to replace the dovish Colin Powell. Ms Rice has said; “The only Military of consequence in the world today are the US Marines”. Her appointment was followed by that of John Bolton as the US ambassador to the UN. John had said “There is no such thing as the United nations.” And that “The UN should be subservient to US interests”

And now with the nomination of Paul Wolfowitz, the former deputy secretary of defense, who was one of the prime movers of the Iraq war, the US is sending clear signals to its adversaries that the 2nd Bush administration will brook no obstructionists in its pursuit of the war on terror that is soon to move against Iran and then against Syria. We may recollect here that Wesley Clark, the former Democratic Presidential wannabe, had disclosed that after 9/11 the Pentagon had drawn up plans to attack seven Muslim countries, one after the other. The campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq have knocked down two of the targets which the Pentagon had listed out. Iran and Syria are the next two. After these two are dealt with the question remains, which are the other three that would remain to be knocked out. Whether those next three will be Sudan, Libya and North Korea, or Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, is anybody’s guess!

In a half serious half jocular vein we suggest to the President to now appoint General William Boykin, the deputy undersecretary of Defense who minces no words while describing Islam and has had a track record of battling Muslims first hand in Somalia, as the new head of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) in place of the Egyptian Mohamed ElBaradei., who has started practicing the Muslim art of deception (Taqqiyya) by saying that Iran has no nukes, and also appoint Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Governor of California to a newly created office of Additional Secretary of State for prosecuting the GWOT. The President should also appoint Rev Pat Robertson, the firebrand preacher as the Secretary of State for Ideological Warfare against Terror with Jerry Falwell as Secretary of State for harvesting the souls of the heathen Muslims in the liberated countries. Only when the US takes the war on an earnest all out offensive against the Muslims, as it did with the Nazis, can the enemy be broken and this war be won

_____________________

An Analysis of President Bush’s Democracy and the GWOT speech (8th March 2005)

In President Bush’s mind there exits a seemingly valid connection between the spread of democracy in the Middle East and victory in the GWOT (Global War on terror). While it is true that with the exercise of universal adult franchise on which rests democracy, the idea of rule of Allah through a Caliph (based on the Shariah as interpreted by the Mullahs), receives a setback. This was why Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, the Jordanian terrorist leader causing mayhem in Iraq decried democracy as anti-Islamic. So every advance of democracy in the Middle East should logically be a set back for the Islamists and their concept of Khilafah (Islamic Caliphate) where the Shariah would be the constitution, and the Mullahs be the wielders power. With democracy, power is transferred to the common people. This is all seemingly very good. But is this what really happens in the Middle East when people exercise universal franchise?

What if a majority of the people who vote, want the establishment of Islamic Khilafah under the rule of Shariah, as interpreted by the Mullahs. Then you end up legitimizing religious fanaticism by using democracy as a tool. Remember mass support for a wrong cause does not make that cause right. Hitler was also elected on a popular mandate!

Yes we had elections in Iraq and that is being touted as a victory for democracy, but it looks like we are on the way to having an Islamic (Shia) fanatic dominated parliament there.

Yes we had elections in the Gaza, Judea and Samaria too, but Abu Mazen calls for a “Greater Jihad” against the “Zionist Enemy” and in the municipal elections there it was the terrorist Hamas which was elected to power.

Yes we had an election in Saudi Arabia, of all places, too. But they just gave legitimacy to a farce in which only males could vote for candidates selected by the Saudi monarchy. This only served to legitimize the hold of the Wahabi monarchy over what will masquerade as democracy.

Yes the global pressure on Lebanon, would see the back of Syrian troops there, but if it means that Hezbollah becomes stronger through the ballot box, as was evident through their massive rally addressed by their terrorist leader Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah, then the ballot box would only legitimize the evil of Islamic fanaticism.

The point is that democracy is only a method, which would be a noble method, only if the people who vote are nobly intentioned. If the people who vote are evil intentioned and support terrorism, then giving them the right to vote leads to evil leaders being elected and legitimized in the name of universal franchise that was exercised thru the one person, one vote principle. Thus the issue to be addressed is not whether people have the right to vote in a free and fair election, but if they have the right temperament and cultural ethos that supports a civilized peace-loving way of life.

The Middle East under Islam does not have this prerequisite for a civilized peace-loving way of life, so whether Muslims are ruled by dictators like Bashar Assad or Hosni Mubarak, or by despotic kings like Fahd or Abdullah, or by Military dictators like Pervez Musharraf, of by elected leaders like the leaders of Hamas or the Shias in Iraq or in Khatami’s Iran, does not make the system civilized just because the leaders have been elected by the people who have exercised universal franchise. Is this point being missed at the White House?

By the way Aslan Maskhadov, the Chechen terrorist leader who was hunted down by the Russians, was also elected by the majority of Chechens. That did not prevent him from murdering school kids at Beslan. Like him, the majority of the people of the Middle East support Terrorism, since their Islamic ethos supports terrorism, as it has been terror that has born and bred Islam since the 7th century when it was founded on terror by the founding father of mass theology-inspired terrorism Mohammed-ibn-Abdallah whom the Muslims look upon as their prophet. Till we zero down on this root cause of terrorism, no amount of universal franchise and elections can change the beastly Islamic core of the people of the Middle East. What has been achieved is a mirage, that will delude us into believing that Iraq or the West Bank are now safer places since the people of those lands have participated in an election. As long as these people are motivated by the murderous ideology of Islam, nothing changes – elections or no elections. In fact if this murderous mentality has to change, we would need ruthless leaders (like Mustapha Kemal Pasha of Turkey) to rule over the Middle East. Leaders who would uproot this murderous mentality from the minds of people, as was done by Stalin’s Russia with the Chechens and which is what ensured peace in Chechnya, till the freedom which the fall of the USSR, gave the Chechens to go back to their murderous roots and start the current campaign of murder and mayhem. By hunting down Aslan Maskhadov, the Russians have shown us the right way to deal with terrorists, whether they be despots or be they elected by majority support of a population who support terrorism.

For freedom to be secure in the long run, it has to be curtailed in the short run, till the murderous mentality of those who want to establish a theocracy based on the murderous mentality of Islam are not eliminated like Maskhadov was. Only after all such criminals are no more, can our experiment with democracy bring peace. President Bush needs to keep this in mind while formulating the future strategy of the GWOT. He can learn a lesson or two from President Putin, instead of hectoring him on the niceties and civilities to be observed by a leader of a democratic nation.

Is any one from the White House reading this?

_______________

Hezbollah and Syria enter the game of suicide attacks on Israel

With the Tel Aviv Night Club bombing, one of our predictions has come true. We had predicted that once the Israel-Palestinian peace deal comes thru and the Hamas/Jihad Islami/Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade suspend the attacks against Israel as part of their Hudna, the Hezbollah (Hizbollah) will not rest quiet, neither will Syria which wants another front to attack the US-Israeli interests to counter the pressure on itself (Syria) to withdraw from Lebanon, due to its murder of Rafiq Hariri, the former President of Lebanon, who was an ardent advocate of Syria’s withdrawal from Israel. That this prediction has come true is not the point (see the story “Shape of things to come in Iraq and the world over”below). The point is about the logical consequences that will follow from this prediction coming true, as we have mentioned, in the story below. Just keep watching as the trajectory of predictions unfolds, barring few aberrations. Our advise to the US and Israel is to not just keep their gunpowder dry, but also to keep their finger on the trigger, to launch retaliatory (if not pre-emptive) strikes against Hezbollah, and their sponsors Iran and Syria.

___________________

Bush – Putin Summit, Democracy and the War on Terror

During World War 2, we destroyed the Nazis by allying ourselves with Stalin’s USSR and China (then under joint Nationalist and Communist rule) which hardly were democratic nations, so we should have no hassles about aligning with Russia and China today to destroy terrorism. Islamic Terrorism is far more pervasive than was Nazism, since Islam is basically a form of theology-inspired terrorism having an emotional grip on the psyche of one billion and a half persons.

And unlike Nazism, Islam is not limited mainly to one nation. So it is all the more critical for the USA and Russia to unite on the war on terror, without making a fuss about the perfections of Russian Democracy. Let the Russian people worry about that. Russia under whatever form of government does not threaten the security of the USA. So President Bush needs to be focused on the commonality of interests between the two, rather than on the different ideas that he and President Putin have about democracy for our respective countries.

The same holds true for China and its human rights record. The Chinese human rights record too, does not threaten American security interests. So it would be foolish for the USA to be fastidious on this issue of democracy in Russia and China. And it would be wise for the Americans and Russians to learn from history. When the Terrorism of the Islamic Jihad started 1400 years back from Arabia, the Muslims faced two formidable powers of those days the Byzantine (Roman) Empire and the Sassanid (Persian) Empire. These two empires were rivals of each other and had fought a protracted war, quite similar to the Cold War of our age. When the Islamic Arab invasion began, these two powers refused to display foresight and did not unite against the Islamic Jihad, and consequently the Muslims defeated and destroyed both the empires one after another, and forcibly converted the population to Islam. Today the Muslim Jihadis hope that Americans and Russians also play the role of the Byzantines and Sassanids so that the Muslims could once again prevail over both. In fact the Al Qaeda, refers to the Americans as Rome and the Russians as Persia. We hope this wisdom dawns on the Americans and Russians too, and the camaraderie displayed when the two Presidents met at Bratislava is preserved and shapes the future course of relations between these two great nations - the United States and the Russian Federation. The Bratislava summit would really serve its purpose if it leads to the formation of a Russo-American military alliance that could defeat the Islamic Jihad and destroy this threat to civilization once and forever.

Presidents Bush and Putin need to stop Russian-American relations from going into a nosedive

If not halted soon, the nosedive in these relations will be a cause of worry for the future course of the War on Terror.

We agree that both the USA ad Russia are different countries and have divergent interests, but they also have one overriding common cause in fighting and winning the war on terror.

Both are fighting the same enemy. But both have divergent interests too. The Russians were wanting to have pro-Russian governments in Georgia and in Ukraine, These Russian objectives have been frustrated by the West, mainly by the USA. Yes, the current governments there represent the will of a majority of the people of Georgia and Ukraine, but are not those which Russia would have preferred viz., Eduard Shevardnadze in Georgia and Viktor Yanukovich in the Ukraine. The West disregarded Russian preferences and let the anti-Russian, but popularly supported leaders like Viktor Yushchenko, (the current president of Ukraine) and Mikhail Saakashvili (the current President of Georgia), to get elected. But then when fighting a common enemy and that too one who is as cut-throat as the Jihadis the Russians and the Americans needs to overlook, such small niceties.

This message holds true for both the USA and Russia. If not, both will undermine each other in the common effort to the benefit of the Jihadis and to the detriment of the entire civilized world.

Yes, immediately after 9/11, the Russian President Vladimir Putin had asked the Americans to jointly undertake the fight against the Jihadis, by first targeting Saudi Arabia the fountainhead of the Jihadi terrorist outlook. But the USA baulked at the prospect of upsetting oil supplies to the West, and decided to go after Iraq, following the successful completion of the short and swift Afghan campaign. The American aim in attacking Iraq was to frighten the Saudis into co-operating. This has worked only partly, as seen in the perfunctory efforts being made by the Saudis in fighting terror on their homeland, and making cosmetic changes in their school curriculums, which call for death to all non-Muslims and holding all male elections to local civic bodies.

But these Saudi efforts are only meant to stave off any resolute US action against the Saudis. As 9/11 told the USA and the West about the ruthlessness of the Jihadis, Beslan did so to the Russians. Both are convinced that the Jihadis have to be fought to a finish. But the Cold War temperament still hangs over the mindset of both the USA and Russia and so both continue to play petty games to outwit the other. This could prove disastrous for the war effort and benefit the Jihadis.

The moves by the USA to support the Viktor Yushchenko, the president of Ukraine and Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili have not gone down well with Russia and President Putin in particular – who is a very sensitive but a determined person. He struck back by offering to sell missiles to Syria and give nuclear technology to Iran. We realize these moves could turn out eventually to be feints to deflect any further anti-Russian moves by the USA. But such moves hurt the overall effort in the war against terror.

After Beslan, the Russians had said that their military is readying itself to strike at terrorists everywhere across the globe. But helping out Iran and Syria with nuclear and missile technology is hardly a way to do so!

We Americans would do well to remember that in a long term and titanic effort which the war on terror is going to be, there need to be many small compromises. The Russian aberrations with regard to democratic finesse and niceties need to be ignored and the USA also needs to be far more sensitive to Russia's sensibilities. Only then can a rock solid alliance among all Western (Latin American, Asian and African) nations be formed. An alliance of which the USA, Russia, France, UK, Germany, Japan, Australia, Canada, Brazil, Spain, Italy, as also India and China would be an active military a part. The USA cannot fight and win this war alone. It is high time we Americans showed more maturity and far-sightedness in dealing with potential allies like Russia China and others.

The US should also not offend China needlessly by trying to blockade European Arms sales to China.

_____________________

Land for peace, in Israel

The Israelis need to realize that by starting on a land for peace deal with the Palestinians, they will eventually be pushed to go on to a faith for peace and finally a life for peace deals. The Palestinians following their Muslim tradition will never negotiate in good faith with any non-Muslims, as their prophet has told them never to compromise with Kafirs (non-Muslims). He himself had set an example by his Treaty of Hudaibiyya in which he tricked and trapped the pre-Muslim Quriash of Mecca. The Israelis better remember that any peace with the Palestinians will be looked upon by the Palestinians as a Hudna, a temporary peace, to re-arm themselves towards the final struggle of destroying the Jewish state. The Land for Peace is a first Palestinian step to push the Israelis down the grave into the next stages of giving up Land for retaining their (Jewish) Faith and finally Land for saving their lives (embrace Islam and be safe). This would be done in the typical Muslim tactic of their ancestors who had started with their prophet Mohammed by giving the Dawat-ul-Islam (Invitation to embrace Islam) to the non-Muslim kings of Persia and Byzantine to embrace Islam and be safe. The Israelis better be aware of Muslim tactics, as is evident from Islam’s bloodied history of 1400 years and refute the deal with the Palestinians, and prepare themselves for a mortal struggle against the Palestinian Jihadis that will certainly come in the near future.

Attack on Iran and Israeli-Palestinian peace - is there an eerie connection between War and Peace

Before the USA invaded Afghanistan, they brokered a peace between India and Pakistan, so that tension between the two south-Asian nuclear powers did not break into open war and complicate the strike on Afghanistan in October 2001. Remember Tony Blair’s many visits to Islamabad and New Delhi, followed by those of Richard Armitage?

The before the Iraq attack was launched, there was a peace contrived between Israel and Palestinians, when Abbas and Sharon were forced to shake hands for the first time. This ensured that a flare up in Israel did not complicate the attack on Iraq.

Now the US is forcing a second peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Can this be a precursor to an attack on Iran.

Lets wait and watch.

North Korea’s Nuclear Challenge

And we hope the US negotiates with Korea on the nuclear issue and works out an alliance with China so that it could focus on the most dangerous enemy of humankind – Islam. Communism is past its prime and anyway it was not as dangerous as Islam, so we need to focus on Islam, while neutralizing Communist states like China, Korea and Cuba, if we cannot bring them into the Western alliance against Islam. A Communist-Islamic nexus is dangerous for the whole of humankind.

____________________________

Waiting for an American Tsunami!

We write this with a heavy heart, but caution readers that this article is not for the faint-hearted.

The coming of the Tsunami has distracted us from the war on terror, but can there be any connection between the Tsunami and the war on terror? Surprisingly so yes, let’s see how. The logic of war demands that any natural (or man-made) disaster has to be exploited against the enemy. Imagine, if a five hundred foot high mega Tsunami had started off in the mid Atlantic and had washed off a large part of the USA and Western Europe as it lashed both shores of the Atlantic, along with a major part of our nuclear arsenal and military capability. Now also imagine that the Arab Muslim world had (as it perhaps has) enough nuclear arsenal to wipe out Israel, Europe and the USA. Would they send across Doctors and medicines to the devastated Western world or would they empty their nuclear arsenals to complete the job of destroying the Western world that the mega Tsunami had left half done?

The answer is obvious. What does a man-eater tiger do when the hunter trips falls and his gun slips from his hands. The man-eater tiger would sink its fangs deep into the hapless hunter’s neck and make a dinner out of him. So what should a hunter do when a tiger slips into a trap laid for him, or gets into a natural bush and gives the hunter an unique opportunity to put a bullet between the tiger’s eyes. A sensible hunter would do precisely that. But what do you say to a hunter who keeps aside his gun and tries to manfully help the tiger out of the trap that he has fallen into. Such a hunter is an inveterate fool.

Now what do you say to the Western countries who are helping the Muslims of Aceh to regain their disrupted livelihoods? We would say our administrations are making the cardinal folly of the hunter who has set aside his gun to save the tiger, rather than killing it.

Since ours is a Judeo-Christian website and would be attracting many Western readers, did not David, first disable Goliath by shooting a rock into this eye, before slaying him? This is precisely what the USA and the West should have done. Bombarded the survivors at Aceh till there were none and then gone over to take over Aceh, followed by the rest of Indonesia and Malaysia. Thus reducing the number of the enemies of humankind by two nations. In fact if a Tsunami, or an earthquake, or a mega sandstorm strikes the Middle East, if the USA has survival instincts, it should capitalize on such a disaster and destroy whatever is left of the infrastructure in the affected areas and take over control by destroying the survivors entirely. This is what the logic of war and survival demands, when we are up against a beastly enemy – the Muslim Jihadis.

The other alternative is to wait for a window of opportunity to open up for a natural disaster to hit the West, which would be utilized by the Jihadis to the hilt to harm the West if not to deliver a final and fatal blow to the West that they are eagerly waiting to do and of which they have declared their intent openly in their slogan – Death to America.

So in our heartless but practical view we ask where is the American military Tsunami which is necessary to complete the work left half done by nature's Tsunami.

If readers do not agree, then pray please tell us if David was wrong in slaying an enemy who had been disabled?

__________________________

An Agenda for President Bush for efficiently winning the War on Terror in his 2nd term Terrorize the Terrorists

Dear President George Bush,

Congratulations on achieving a much deserved win in the elections. Now President Sir, you need to give a fresh look to our strategy in the war on terror. So far our tactic has been to overpower regimes like those of the Taliban and Saddam in a conventional combat. The enemy stands no chance of prevailing against us in such combat. But once we prevail over the enemy, then starts the second phase of covert guerilla warfare where the enemy snipers and mortar gunners and shoulder fired stinger missile operators can pick up our marines one at a time at their convenience in an endless sniper war. No army howsoever powerful with conventional weapons using conventional war tactics can win such a sniper war. At this juncture when are about to repeat (after the 2004 Presidential elections) the same war strategy in Syria, Iran and then maybe elsewhere, it is high time for us to consider the other option – the Hiroshima option Had we not used this option by bombing Hiroshima and then after a few days bombed Nagasaki, the Japs may never have surrendered that fast and would have taken many more American lives. In today’s War on Terror, instead of sending our marines into Syria and then Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, etc to win a conventional war, only to be bled day by day in a sniper war as is happening in Iraq, we should use the Hiroshima tactic of picking off some cities in the target countries and then setting out terms of surrender to the target Muslim country:

The terms should include (among other terms) the following:

- Lay down your arms, by disbanding your army and police.
- Hand over all weapons to the allied forces at the borders.
- Give up Islam as your religion, and the Quran as your religious book and the Shariah as your lawbook; or else face more Hiroshimas.
- Demolish all your Mosques and Madrasas.
- Ban the use of Hijab, Chador, Burkha by females.
- Ban the wearing of religious caps and growing of beards (a la Ataturk) by males.
- Accept any one of the non-Muslim religions.
- Agree to establish parliamentary democracy and secularism.
- Any non-compliance will lead to more Hiroshimas.

This way we can win the war on terror by sending a minimum number of marines into hostile territory and taking only a minimum number of casualties. This tactic would also have immense psychological impact on the terrorists, since in spite of the contempt they have for life, they would be under tremendous pressure from their co-religionists to stop targeting the civilized world, since many more Muslims would die in retaliation. Only this can work, since the Muslims fear nothing other than overwhelming force. The history of Islam for the last fourteen hundred years since Islam was founded, is evidence of this.

Act before the Nuclearization of Terrorism makes the War on Terror a Nightmare

But we need to act on this pretty fast, before the Jihadis acquire nuclear capability, making the nuclear option useless. And future Nuclear terror attacks makes 9/11 seem like a dress rehearsal. While the right focus is placed on the proliferation of nuclear capability in Iran; not much attention is being paid to Pakistan. Today Pakistan has 30 nuclear warheads. If we wait for a few years, then this number will grow to 200 warheads and they would be dispersed in different countries in different hands, some of these hands would belong to the Al Qaeda. The Al Qaeda-Pakistan Army connection is not just a bogey. It is real. Some serving officers have been detained for having passed on critical information to the Al Qaeda. We also need to remember that when Musharraf was in the US, General Aziz, Gen Musharraf’s right hand man who brought him to power, had said that “America is Islam’s enemy number one.”

So we need to urgently and decisively act against all nuclear aspiring Muslim states, especially the only Muslim Nuclear power which has aggressively named its Atom bomb the Islamic Bomb – Pakistan. Unless we act before the Nuclearization of Terrorism makes the War on Terror a Nightmare, we shall unfortunately have to confront Jihadis having nuclear arms and have only the following two dead-end options:

- be prepared to either end up destroying all life on this globe fighting the Jihadis to death;
- or surrender to the Jihadis and accept Islam as the religion for the entire world!

Yes, we are well aware that our Hiroshima option suggestion will be censored by those many blind-to-reality liberals and those hand-in-glove friends of the Jihadis those defeated communists and discredited left-leaning liberals of the Noam Chomsky clan. But we can bypass their objections and set our determination to go about winning the war on terror with such daring non-conventional means – since we face a non-conventional enemy. Only such smartness and iron-will can break the Jihadis and the Islamic faith that represents their world view which is today shared by one billion and a half humans. The other option is a Vietnam all over the places we go – Afghanistan, Iraq, followed by Syria, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia with an endless stream of body bags coming home and a clamor to end the war, with a prospect of losing the war on terror to a beastly enemy signaling the end of human progress and civilization.

Our current policy of sending in ground troops and policing the Muslim countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, once we have subdued the established governments, is fast proving to be a failure. The Jihadi snipers can pick our marines one by one at ease and bleed us as they are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. While we foolishly spend billions of dollars in reconstruction of these countries in an effort to win their hearts and minds. Such reconstruction is meaningless since their hearts and minds are anyway turned against us in a civilizational divide that goes back to the foundation of Islam where for them, we are unbelievers and infidels who should be converted to Islam by force or be killed or be humiliated to be treated as dhimmis (second class citizens). The Jihadis care two hoots for reconstruction of Iraq or Afghanistan, in fact they want to disrupt this reconstruction effort and make a laughing stock out of us. The number of Muslims who support us is negligible, and they too are scared to death to openly support us. Till the beastly mentality of Islam is not eradicated, it is futile for us to spend money to reconstruct these countries. It is also futile to establish democracy and secularism in these countries till the temperamental core of these countries remains Islamic. The paranoid submission to religion that Islam demands alongwith the call of Jihad to convert the world to Islam, goes against the spirit of both democracy and secularism. The countries of the Muslim world that we overrun are not Germany or Japan after World War 2. The populations of the Muslim countries hate us in a civilizational divide dating back to the foundation of Islam. This was not so in the case of Germany or Japan.

We need to first. break the stranglehold of Islam on the minds of these people and this calls for iron-clad measures. Only after we are able to break Islam, can we start the reconstruction of the post Islamic ex-Muslim countries. Till then the smart thing would be withdraw our troops from Afghanistan and Iraq and not send any more in the Islamic crescent. And to give Iraq and Afghanistan followed by other Islamic countries the Hiroshima treatment, one after the other, till they either give up Islam or perish.

Safeguarding our rear by neutralizing the enemy within

But before we begin such action globally, we need to safeguard our rear, in our homeland. For this we need to take into preventive custody all those whose loyalties as Americans are suspect. All Americans of middle-eastern origin and all tourists and students of Arab and Muslim extraction, including all Arab and Muslims in our military, should be relocated into reserves to be kept out of harms way (i.e. to keep them from harming us). We know that this suggestion will draw explosive reactions, but we cannot fight a war with half-hearted measures. The enemy we have living amidst us today in the War on Terror is far unlike the Japanese Americans or German Americans or those locally bred Nazis of World War 2 vintage. The enemy living amidst us today is really malignant and malicious. Only with our rear safeguarded we can rest assured that we will not be stabbed in our back in our homeland with our bridges blown off, railroads messed around and subway stations gassed, while we pursue the war on terror across the globe. No amount of pacification and appeasement by declaring that “Islam is a religion of peace” and by visiting Mosques will help us in protecting our rear and flanks, when we start sending broadsides to hit our enemy’s jugular in the final struggle. Hence these iron-clad measures need to be taken before we start the final struggle. There are no soft options if we are to win against a beastly enemy. Please ponder upon this unorthodox but honest advice, Mr. President.

Yours Sincerely

- Robin MacArthur
On behalf of the Team of Webmasters

http://www.newsonterror.com

P.S. : Looks like what we have recommended here has struck a responsive chord at the Pentagon. Recently an analysis of US war policy criticized a proposed Pentagon plan to use low potency nukes on enemy targets. Although the article is critical of the direction US policy is taking. We are heartened to note that the policy finally shows some sense in recognizing how a beastly enemy can be overcome.

Your comments on this report

______________________

How the bluff of Islam can be called, if we are to succeed in meeting the Muslim challenge to Human Civilization

All fanaticism is negative, all religious fanaticism is very negative and persistent – be it Hindu, Christian, Muslim or any other, and Islam is the most bloodthirsty expression of religious fanaticism; motivated as the Muslims are by the Instruction Manual of Terrorism – the Quran that has the ravings and rantings against the Kafirs (unbelievers) from the world’s most successful terrorist and the founding father of organized terrorism; Prophet Mohammed-ibn-Abdallah.

Reading about the Fidayeen attacks by Homicide bombers posing as a Jewish Rabbis, ordinary travellers in Jerusalem or as security guards and construction workers in Iraq, should be an eye opener at the Pentagon and the Oval office about the Muslim mind. The Muslim Homicide (or rather Genocide) Fidayeen bombers are now dead and so they can cause no more harm to anyone. This gives us insight into a morbid, but very real fact that – “A good Muslim, is a dead Muslim.” Many would recoil while reading such morbid-sounding statements. But all the Israeli schoolchildren and bus passengers killed were done to death by Muslims who also killed themselves in the bargain, the hijackers of the airliners on 9/11 could cause that apocalyptic destruction, because they too decided to die while killing others. Apart from 9/11, the Riyadh, Baghdad, Jerusalem, Casablanca, Karachi, Mumbai, Bali, Chechnya Bomb blasts ..and many more to come, all prove the same point.

A Muslim is in the business of killing – killing himself/herself while killings others of his/her species. If the human sanity is to survive Islam, then the bluff of Islam needs to be called. And it can be called only when Islam and all its believers face the threat and real prospect of being sent into the stillness of death. A stillness from where they could do no more harm to anyone else. In this scenario at times some innocents may get killed. Can’t help it when the scenario dictates that you either “kill or be killed”.

Those who want succeed in fighting the Jihad, have to out-match the boldness and paranoid commitment of the Muslims by declaring that their singular mission is to wipe out Islam from the face of this planet whatever that may cost in terms of human lives

And in this war, temporary setbacks to the Muslim Jihadis, like those in Afghanistan and Iraq serve no purpose, except for making them more wild and more willing to die while killing others. They are like man-eater tigers whom we Americans are merely wounding, but not hunting down. A hurt tiger is even more ferocious. So are the Jihadis. The point is to hunt down the Jihadis, so that they are dead meat, and so can harm no one any longer. They cannot be won over, their hearts cannot be won over. The only way into the heart of a Jihadi is to put a bullet into it! Till we Americans realize this bitter truth, we cannot win the war on terror.

We need to remember that the Muslims are audacious, they are paranoid, they are reckless, they don’t fear death, they seek it and welcome it, but only if they can kill others while killing themselves. They celebrate their own death and of their enemies, they rejoice at their enemy’s death and dance over their corpses. Islam is a psychological disorder from which one billion humans on this planet suffer. And so we need a doctor to perform the surgery to cut of this cancerous cyst of Islam from the body of global human society, or else the Human species will not survive as a civilized species.

The only way to defeat Islam is for its adversaries to outmatch the fanaticism, the audacity, the recklessness and the lust to kill that the Muslims have. Only a world leader who openly declares that it is his/her aim to destroy Islam worldwide by using thermonuclear weapons, can possibly strike terror in the minds (of the heartless) Muslims. Only he/she can defeat the Muslims, and deliver the human species from the paranoia of Islam. Yes, in Europe, there have been such leaders who came closest to defeating Islam. Leaders like Karl the Hammer who slaughtered two hundred thousand Muslim Arabs troops on the battlefield of Tours (Poitiers) 200 Kms. south of Paris, ending their Jihad in Western Europe in 732 C.E. and saved Europe from Islam. In Asia, there was Hulagu Khan who in 1238 sacked and burnt Baghdad to the ground after killing the Caliph alongwith the entire population of Baghdad, by putting the city to torch, bringing an end to the Islamic Caliphate. In normal times such persons cannot be role models for a civilized person, but these are abnormal times and do if we are to succeed in our mission to save Human civilization from the challenge of Islam, we need to destroy Islam, and for that unfortunately, we need to emulate Hulagu and Karl the Hammer (Charles Martel). In fact we need better their record by being even more efficient in the task, that they set about doing – since today our focus is global.

Yes this sounds morbid, but the alternative is our own destruction and the eclipse if not demise of Human civilization at the hands of the Muslims. For achieving this a determination to vaporize all forms of life across the Islamic crescent from Morocco to Indonesia is unavoidable. Not that one billion Muslims will have to be actually put to death (hopefully not), but only if such determination exists and is openly displayed, can we bring any sense into the minds of those of our species who operate at a beastly level. So we agree with our President George Bush when he says “we’ll hunt down” our enemies. If the enemy is a beast, then to save yourself you gotta be a hunter!

And unfortunately, if the Muslims persist in being paranoid killers that they have been for the last One Thousand and Four Hundred years since Islam was founded by the world’s most successful terrorist and the founding father of organized terrorism, the prophet Mohammed-ibn-Abdallah, then for the benefit of the rest of humankind, this determination would have to be acted upon up to its gory end. Our guess (and hope) is that once the Muslims see the determination in the rest of the world to destroy Islam whatever it has to cost in terms of human lives, can they sue for peace. And if they don’t, they will have to be sent into the stillness of death, so that the human species can once again pick up the journey towards building human civilization, in the post-Islamic phase of Human History.

We are told over and over again that the Muslims love death while killing others; and that they celebrate martyrdom while putting others to death. Great! Now it is high time for the rest of us to come together so that this death-seeking and death-glorifying bluff of Islam can be called by declaring that we intend to give martyrdom to all Muslims all over the globe. Islam that was born by the sword can go away only by the sword. Let’s see if all of them choose death or at least some of them choose to come to their senses. Either way the world stands to gain. We need to give them this hard choice if we are to succeed in meeting the Muslim challenge to Human Civilization.

Your comments on this report

______________________

What makes Muslims a criminal community?

A study of the Quran is enough to answer this question. This is what I read in the Quran In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful (sic)

"Do not take the Jews and Christians for friends" (Surah 5:51)
"..fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness" (Surah 9:123)
"..fight those who do not believe in Allah" (Surah 9:29)
"..and fight them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah" (Surah 8:39)
"..fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace" (Surah 9:14)
"..Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them" (Surah 9:30)
"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" (Surah 8:12)

No wonder till people on this planet consider such an Instruction Manual of Terrorism to be the inviolable word of some god, we shall see people who are not just willing to kill, but wanting to kill those who do not conform to their world view. They can be stopped only if they are brainwashed out of this delusion or are stopped by some, rather ANY other means… as long as they are stopped. Any ideas on how to stop them from their perverted business of killing?

_________________________

Now let's roll with Western Private Militias against the Terrorists...or should we??

We have had enough with the beheadings of Western Professionals who are in Iraq to help re-build that country. The beheadings of Armstrong and Hensley and many others like Berg, Pearl in the past is a harbinger of worse things to come in the Middle East. All American professionals, diplomats and marines are in danger of being hacked one after the other and all of them need to go on the offensive. The question is HOW?

There are thousands of Western professionals scattered all across the Middle East. In the given circumstances, we have two options. To cut and run, or take the war into the enemy camp. The time has come to think and act on unorthodox lines. Can we suggest that Western and more so American professionals should team up with US marines, diplomats and CIA operatives located across the globe and form informal secretive partisan cells to share technology selectively to cause napalm and scaled neutron explosions in the most notorious mosques across the globe during Friday prayers when most of the terrorists gather to listen to the incitement of the Mullahs? Can we suggest this?? Can we say that we need to get them when they are at the game of inciting and getting incited.

Can we say that in New York good targets to begin with are the Jersey City Mosque at 539 Bergen Avenue, the Islamic Center of Asbury Park at 209 Bond Street, the American Islamic Academy at 110 Harrison Street, Boonton, and the Masjid Al Haqq at 689 Springfield Avenue, Newark. And in London we can start with the Finsbury Park mosque of the notorious Muslim cleric Abu Hamza, the Brixton Mosque in south London whose imam Abdullah el-Faisal, was convicted of soliciting murder and three charges involving stirring up racial hatred. No way! So can we suggest that blowing up Muslim marchers in Western cities and also the peaceniks is also a good idea, can we ever suggest this?? No way. NEVER!

Can we suggest that it would be superb if our private militias succeed in blowing up the nuclear facilities at Natanz and Bushehr by teaming up with the Iranian student movement who are dead opposed to the Mullahs who are in the last stages of making an A-bomb.

We say this in desperation as we have so far have proved to be ineffectual in understanding the ghoulish aims of the enemies of civilization. We need to team up with Israelis, Serbs, and all others who have had experience with fighting Muslims in an unorthodox way and carry the war into the enemy camp. Can we dare to say that sympathetic officers in CIA, the Scotland Yard and Mossad can help out. In fact they can take the initiative in this, other volunteers would join in later. Can we suggest this?? No way! Can we say that private volunteers joining in would have to be fiercely committed to this cause and method. Can we suggest this?? No way! Can we say that they would need to be thoroughly screened and tested out for their will power before they can be deployed. Can we suggest this?? No way! Can we say that this is no game for the faint-hearted and lily-livered.

Can we suggest this?? No way! Can we say that we need to come up with ideas and deploy unorthodox methods that can work in taking the war into the enemy’s camp and put the fear of death in them too. NO WAY!

Can we ever say all this even in our dreams, NO WAY, WE CAN NEVER EVER SAY ANYTHING EVEN HALF AS DEADLY.But the fact is that what we have seen from 9/11/2001 till today is a "Phoney War" like the one we saw in 1939 and 1940, till the Nazis turned the Maginot Line and invaded France via Belgium and Netherlands. After all we know that appeasing the enemy will win us the war as it did World War 2, or did it?? Was the war won by the pamphlets that we threw to the Boches (the German rookies) manning the Seigfried Line, calling on them to stop fighting and make peace with the allies? Or did the D Day landing followed by our relentless march through France, Belgium into Germany culminating with the bombing of Dresden, win us the war?

Today we cannot as private citizens take the law into our hands. We need to wait till the necessary wisdom dawns on our leaders. Till then can we at least picket the mosques mentioned here (and others) on every Friday and tell the Muslims that we want them to ask their co-religionists to stop what they are doing. Ask them to stop their co-religionists from beheading us, after all we have better uses for our heads rather than providing them to the Islamofascists as targets to be sawed off, and then posting those gruesome videos on the internet. Let us do the least to take the message home to the world at large that we are annoyed, very annoyed at the beheadings.

Your comments on this report

__________________________

Nuclear Terror Attack coming soon - The only question is when and where precisely?

The nuclear clock is ticking close to doomsday. This is no panic statement. The 9/11 Commission has said that the greatest failure that led to the 9/11 attacks was "a failure of imagination". Today we are witnessing a similar "failure of imagination" about the oncoming nuclear terror attack. If the US administration does not want to launch a pre-emptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities before the elections, the least it can do is to declare that a nuclear terror attack on the USA (or any other allied country) will be met by a severe nuclear response. This can at least deter the Islamofascist desperadoes and make them think twice of the devastation a US retaliation will cause, before they release the nuclear capability which they already have acquired.

Your comments on this report

__________________________

How America should respond to a nuclear terror attack on our Homeland

On Oct. 11, 2001, exactly a month after the 9/11attacks, a report by a CIA source, codenamed Dragonfire was submitted to President Bush. The report spoke about a 10-kiloton nuclear weapon that has been smuggled by the Al Qaeda into New York city and is being held to be used at a time considered appropriate by the terrorists. At that time this report was not publicized to prevent panic in an already traumatic situation. But responding to this piece of intelligence, the President sent off the Vice President Dick Cheney to an undisclosed location, to keep the administration running in case the administration was disrupted by a nuclear attack on either New York or Washington DC or both places simultaneously. Remember Dick Cheney joking with journalists that his cave was better than Bin Laden's. There was a serious truth behind that light-hearted statement, that the US administration had taken the nuclear threat from the Al Qaeda with deadly earnest.

That threat has never faded, in fact it has become more imminent today with the happenings in the Iraq and all over the Middle East. An article in the New York Times, asks "Could a Nuclear attack on America happen?"

Its answer is, "Unfortunately, it could - and many experts believe that such an attack, somewhere, is likely." The Aspen Strategy Group, a bipartisan assortment of policy experts, focused on nuclear risks at its annual meeting in New York recently, and the consensus was twofold: the danger of nuclear terrorism is much greater than the public believes.

According to the CIA, the weapon had supposedly been stolen from Russia, which indeed has many 10-kiloton weapons. Russia is reported to have lost some of its nuclear materials, and Al Qaeda has mounted a determined effort to get or make such a weapon. And the C.I.A. had picked up Al Qaeda chatter immediately after 9/11, about an "American Hiroshima."

President Bush dispatched nuclear experts to New York to search for the weapon and sent Dick Cheney and other officials out of town to ensure the continuity of government in case a weapon exploded in Washington instead. But to avoid panic, the White House told no one in New York City, not even Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

In addition to Dragonfire's report, similar reports - that Al Qaeda has its hands on a nuclear weapon from the former Soviet Union - have regularly surfaced in the intelligence community, even though such a report has never been confirmed. We do know several troubling things: Al Qaeda negotiated for a $1.5 million purchase of uranium (apparently of South African origin) from a retired Sudanese cabinet minister; its envoys traveled repeatedly to Central Asia to buy weapons-grade nuclear materials; and Osama bin Laden's top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, boasted, "We sent our people to Moscow, to Tashkent, to other Central Asian states, and they negotiated, and we purchased some suitcase [nuclear] bombs."

William Perry, the former American Secretary of Defense, says there is an even chance of a nuclear terror strike on America in the near future. "We're racing toward unprecedented catastrophe," Mr. Perry warns. "This is preventable, but we're not doing the things that could prevent it." The White House has insisted on tackling the most peripheral elements of the W.M.D. threat, like Iraq, while largely ignoring the central threat, nuclear proliferation. The upshot is that the risk that a nuclear explosion will devastate an American city is greater now than it was during the cold war, and it's growing.

The question now is how do we prevent an attack. And even if succeed in preventing the first attempt, how do we ensure that the attempt will not be repeated, as it surely will be. The enemy we face is a determined one. It made the first attempt at blowing up the WTC in 1993, and when that attempt failed, it tried once again at the same target, on 9/11, this time with success. If we succeed in thwarting the first attempt, that would be real good. But what next. Will the enemy stop in its tracks? No way. The enemy fights us as a matter of faith. Their Instruction Manual of Terror (the Quran) asks them to wage unrelenting war against us unbelievers in a endless global Jihad. 9/11/2001 is just the date on which the jihad made a Grande Entree into the American homeland. The Jihad had reached Europe much earlier and had been first turned back at the battle of Tours in Central France in 732 and later at Vienna in 1699. Failure for the Jihadis is just a blimp on their relentless march against us infidels. They will come back again, and again and again, till either we or they cease to exist. So our success in thwarting their first nuke attack, would mean only one thing, the enemy will strike again, only the time and place would be uncertain. How do we face up to this scenario.

Our history tells us "One who pulls the trigger first, lives." So in this scenario, pulling the trigger first would mean: We should give up our fixation that the aim of the war effort is to keep the oil flowing to our gas stations by securing the oilfields and the pipelines, nor should we be hamstrung by the fiction that we can win over our enemy the Muslims - all of whom consider the Quran to be the word of God and the Quran tells them to wage everlasting war on us. This would make our nominal allies like King Fadh, King Abudullah, Prez Mubarak also our enemies along with Saddam and Osama. Since all of them uphold the Quran and the Quran asks them to wage everlasting war on us. During World War 2, we Americans never tried to win over the Nazis. And the attempts by the British Prime Minister Chamberlain to appease the Nazis only made them more defiant and hold the Western allies in contempt. Only when we started to speak with them in language of carpet bombs and land assaults did the Nazi threat come to an end. We need to do the same with our enemy of today - the Muslims. Bring an end to all of them. This will sound an over-simplification to most readers. But think about it. How many Muslims want a rapprochement with us and want to share a milti-cultural world? How many of them allow multi-ethnic and multi-religious societies to exist, how many of their countries are democracies, how many of them are pacifists, how many of them want to use science and technology for the general benefit of humankind? This is a measure of how low the Muslims are on the scale of being human.

As against all this, how many of them hold a grudge against us and do not condemn the 9/11 attacks? How many of them defend the 9/11 attacks by saying that there are roots causes for the attacks and that we are to blame for these root causes like not allowing the Arabs to destroy Israel? How many of them take to the streets to trample on the Stars and Stripes? How many of them cry "Death to America"? How many of them burn effigies of our President? And how many of them are plotting in sleeping cells to launch the next Jihadi Bloodbath against us? This is a barometer of their hatred for us. The only reason why they have not yet harmed us the way they would like to is that their hatred for us is not matched by their capability to harm and destroy us. That is our only saving grace. This is why all of them have not yet taken up arms against us. Once they have the capability, there will be nothing to stop them from destroying us, since they already have the will to destroy us, as sanctioned by their Quran. So what option do we have in this scenario. And how do go about saving ourselves from destruction at the hands of those who are straining on their leash to devour us? Only a leader who can be the destroyer of Islam and the killer of all Muslims can be a savior of humankind. And this leader will have to go about a strategy that would have the following broad outline for its success with minimal loss of American lives:

Today's strategy of sending in ground troops leads to many American casualties and fatalities; and after winning a conventional war against the enemy, tying down our troops to re-build their countries is foolish and only strengthens the enemy and leads to an unending list of casualties by sniper fire, roadside bombs and suicide bombers. So we need to make our present strategy stand on its head by doing the following:

- Withdraw all American business persons, professionals and all other non-combatant personnel from all Muslim countries.

- Next, withdraw all American diplomatic and consular staff who need to be retained in the first stage for processing the papers of all other non-combatants who leave.

- At the next stage withdraw all American defense personnel and infrastructure, destroying that infrastructure that cannot be relocated.

- Stop the immigration of Muslims into America, expelling all those who are here on a H1 and L1 visas (Students and Professionals).

- Those Muslims who are American citizens or Green Card holders and who cannot be deported, should all be taken into preventive custody, and held in detention camps as we held the much less dangerous Japanese Americans during WW2.

Needless to add that the present Presidential system and the existing legal framework would have to be suitably changed to accommodate these measures. We are living in conditions of war and peacetime laws cannot meet the situation we face today

Once this is done the second phase of the strategy can begin with a pre-emptive missile assault on enemy targets (of all Muslims nations, starting from the most belligerent) to take out their nuclear and conventional military capability, telecommunications infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, going down to civilian targets as the operations progress. The primary condition for stopping our military operations has to be a complete and permanent repudiation of Islam by all Muslims. Failing which an attack that would begin with MOABs and Daisy Cutters should progress to using Nuclear Hydrogen and Neutron payloads on the missiles that would land on enemy territory.

We need not have qualms while doing this, since the enemy would do this to us if and when he can. The only thing that stops him from doing this today is that he does not have the capability to match his will to destroy us. And the cherry on the pie lies in the very curious fact the destruction of Islam has been foretold in the Quran itself which says:

"There will come a day when there will be no one on earth to say; 'Lah Allah il Allah Mohammed Ur Rasoolallah' ('There is no god but allah and mohammed is his prophet')."

Needless to tell you that if the inhuman and subhuman creed of Islam is not brought to a complete and permanent end, human civilization has no future. The devilish creed of Islam has to be checkmated, reversed and rolled back to Mecca and buried into the stillness of death from where it will never ever arise to torment humankind again. It is up to America to deliver humankind from the threat of Islam by saving itself and saving the rest of humanity from doom. Can the US rise to the occasion before it is too late?

Your comments on this report

______________________________

Rise Russia Rise - The savagery with the school kids of Beslan demands retribution

Russia’s heart is bleeding, The dead, wounded and traumatized school kids of Beslan tell us that. This calls for retribution. This is not the time for inaction in the name of patience or forbearance. Russians and especially their leaders, need to revive the spirit of their ancestors who drove out from Russia the Mongol Tartars of the Golden Horde and saved Europe from the Mongols, Russia needs to revive the spirit of the doughty Cossacks who drove out Napoleon and of those brave partisans who drained out Hitler’s Nazis in the snows outside Moscow to defeat and destroy Nazism completely.

No one came to Russia’s aid in all these three defining moments in its history. Ancient Rus fought alone, it fought bravely and fought successfully, always taking the fight into the enemy’s territory and destroying the enemy in the enemy’s home. Russian troops entered the Mongol Tartar heartland and tamed the barbarians by bringing civilization to Central Asia from where the Tatars had invaded Russia. Russian troops ended the Napoleonic invasion by reaching Paris and they also ended Hitler’s savage attack by plunging the Russian army into Berlin.

Today Beslan is a challenge to the Russian spirit. Russia needs to awaken its spirit if it is to save itself from further savagery. Russia can do it, and Russia can do it alone as it did with the Tartars, with Napoleon and with the Nazis. The Tartars were defeated by Russia absolutely single-handedly, while in the war with Napoleon and with the Nazis too, the Western allies came into the picture after Russia had defeated the invader on Russia's home ground single-handedly.

Likewise today Russia needs to act single-handedly and take the war into the enemy’s home. If the Arabs can attack Russians in Russia, then Russia needs to attack Arabs in the Arab world. We Americans have been pusillanimous so far at least. We have made a poor showing till today in Afghanistan and Iraq. Russia needs to take the lead in the war on terror from now onwards – America and the West will follow as Waterloo (in 1815) followed Borodino in 1812 and Normandy (in 1944) followed Stalingrad in 1942.

Russia needs to start with a target, which the Americans will not crib about. If Russia attacks Saudi Arabia, American oil supplies will be affected and upset the faulty American game-plan of ensuring that oil keeps flowing to the west while grappling with the terrorists and their sponsors in the Middle East. Russia may not want to attack Iran, because of Russia's strategically wrong relations with the Mullahs in their (Iran's) quest for nuclear capability. So given the compulsions of the ground situation today and Russia’s interests and the possible American response; Russia can at least start with crashing missiles into a target that the Americans would find acceptable while also making an example of the Arabs.

Now hold your breath – Russia can safely crash a nuclear tipped missile into Damascus. A couple of million deaths in an Arab capital, should send in tremors down the spine of all those who distribute candy whenever the terrorists succeed in their murderous designs. America also should also not mind that in the war on terror, the nuclear button is first pushed by Russia; an inheritor of the mantle of its Cold War enemy - the USSR. Unless Russia takes the war against terror outside Russian borders urgently, it cannot deliver the needed message to the terror masters in the Middle East. Russia needs to rise and needs to make one capital in the Arab world into a nuclear wasteland, with a warning that the next Beslan will bring Russian nukes crashing on the next Arab capital. The Arabs can keep guessing, which of them will be the unlucky one next time around. This will have an electrifying effect on the USA and the West. Les miserable Francais (the French Government) will whine, the Germans will crib, even the British could wring their hands and the USA would wonder how to take the initiative in the war on terror back into its hands. This might stir the USA and UK into action by following up on the Russian lead and the whining French with their allies would be left with the only option of thumping the lecterns at the UN General Assembly. But the world would be on the path of being saved from the beastly terror that is today writ on the traumatized faces of the school kids of Beslan.

Rise Russia Rise, you need to save yourself and also arouse America in the process, while saving human civilization from the worst barbarism of all times - the Islamic Jihad, which if not challenged in the language of blood and death, will soon move from Beslan to Bradford to Boston to Beijing and to wherever else it can dig its dirty fangs.

Your comments on this report

________________

Under what circumstances can the USA lose the War on Terror to the Jihadis

A crazy question any reader would say. The USA, the strongest power on earth, losing to a bunch of disorganized, although highly motivated thugs! Hah! Impossible! But before we endorse this obvious judgment, let us for a minute take a look at how the Jihadis have made true their word on impending attacks. In 1993, after the abortive first attempt on the WTC, one of the terrorists Ramzi Yousef said to his captors that next time around the WTC would not survive a Jihadi attack. And so it did happen that on 9/11/2001, the WTC did crumble in face of the second Jihadi attack!

Another instance is the Madrid Train bombings. The Spanish Govt had been given due warnings by the terrorists. In October 2003, five months before the Madrid train bombings, assassins shot a Spanish military attaché in Iraq, José Antonio Bernal Gómez, near his residence; in November, seven Spanish intelligence agents were ambushed and murdered south of Baghdad. Photographs of the killers standing on the agents’ bodies circulated on Islamist Web sites. Another Internet document soon appeared, titled “Message to the Spanish People,” signed by the Information Commission for the Help of the Iraqi People (Department of Foreign Propaganda), which threatened more attacks. “Return to your country and live peacefully,” it demands, or else “the battalions of the Iraqi resistance and its supporters outside of Iraq are able to increase the dosage and will eclipse your memory of the rotten spies.” True to their word the Jihadis carried out the Madrid train bombings five months later.

Even in history, the Jihadis back in the 7th century when they started the Jihad had challenged and openly threatened empires far stronger then the fledging Jihadi forces. Empires like the Persia and Byzantine. The Jihadis overcame both of these through daring attacks. While Persia fell in seventeen years from 634 to 651, Byzantine fell after eight centuries from the first attacks on it at Yarmuk in 637 to the fall of Constantinople in 1453. The reason for this delay was holding of the Jihadis at the Cilician Gates in southern Asia Minor (Turkey) up to the 10th century and later the intervention of the Crusades. But in spite of this Byzantine also fell to the Jihadis, who after that reached Vienna in the 17th century.

What is the lesson from all these ancient happenings in the 21st century? One may say all this is irrelevant. The USA is the sole Superpower today and can destroy the world seven times over. Oh yes it can, but what if Jihadis get hold of enough nuclear ammo to blow all State Capitals in the USA simultaneously along with all capital cities in Europe?

A preposterous scenario, you would say! Oh yes, it does sounds preposterous even to the authors of this piece. But then we have poured over the history of military tactics of the Jihadis over the last fourteen centuries which have been made more supple, stealthy and surreptitious in the 21st century by the, miniaturization of nuclear technology (suitcase bombs) facilitated by globalization of banking networks that make money laundering easy to finance these nefarious operations and the easy availability of nuclear building blocks from the remnants of the former Soviet Union.

Before we could dismiss the Jihadis boast that they would soon speak the Language of Blood with Europe and USA we need to very seriously consider their advise to the Muslim citizens of Europe and USA to return to Muslim countries to save themselves from attacks that would make 9/11 eclipse from memory. This certainly is no empty boast, given the track record of the Jihadis and it points in the direction of a devastating surprise in store for us in the West. 9/11 was a trailer of the attacks to come and in spite of Homeland security and the new Intelligence Super-Czar that the President is to create in light of the 9/11 Commission’s Report, we are ill-prepared to face the next Jihadi blood bath.

All indications point to a devastatingly large and geographically spread out attack that would be carried out in Europe and the USA by the thousands of sleeper cells that are quietly preparing to unleash their murderous designs on us. We need not be deceived once again by the fact that American citizens of Middle-Eastern origin, have merged perfectly into American society. We need only to remember that the 9/11 hijackers had families on whom they doted, were members of health clubs, visited pubs and night clubs and nobody could ever raise even half an eyebrow to suspect what they were about to do. If we today continue to live in a fool’s paradise about the innocuousness of Arab –Americans, then we would be inviting a calamity on ourselves. A nuclear 9/11 would burst on us any day. The only difference would be that it would happen simultaneously in all major American cities (and perhaps European Cities as well) . Unless of course if we rise to the occasion, put all Arab-Americans of Muslim extraction under observation in reserves (as we did with the much less dangerous Japanese-Americans in WW2), and launch a pre-emptive strike against all Muslim nations. Is that too much to ask to save ourselves from annihilation?

Your comments on this report

_______________________________

A psy-ops reply to Beheadings by the Jihadis?

With the Beheadings of foreigners in Iraq showing the true fangs of the Jihadi terrorists, we need to use some psychological-operations against them. The only way these god-crazy lunatics can be stopped in their tracks is by putting the fear of god (sic) into them. Although god is a creation of human imagination, these god-driven psychos - the Jihadis, will respond only to severe measures like forcibly making them stomp over the Quran with their feet, while they are alive, smearing pig's fat on their bodies, stuffing their their mouths with bacon and ham, and pouring wine into their mouths; and after they are disposed off, burying them with their feet towards Mecca where lies buried allah, the Satan of the Pagans.. This method needs to be publicized, to deter other Jihadis. This technique can be implemented by an informal agency without involving the marines or any official agency to prevent the predictable uproar from the Jihadis and their clients - those decadent Communists and peaceniks.

This would - in the crazy logic of the Jihadis ensure that they do not reach heaven (Jannat). We know this sounds crazy and barbaric. But then we are dealing with those who glorify death while killing others and can only understand this language. If readers find our suggestion to be Mad enough, they may send in suggestions which could be as effective to break the morale of the Jihadis.

__________________________

The greatest tribute to Ronald Reagan lies in pointing out the difference between Ronnie and Dubya

Ronald Reagan called a spade a spade, he minced no words to call the Communist bloc an "Evil Empire". George Bush is yet to call the Islamic bloc an "Evil Empire". To defeat an enemy you need to be loud and clear why you are opposing him, and words should reflect this outlook to pursue your enemy’s destruction relentlessly, as they did with Ronald Reagan.

Had Ronald Reagan been President on 9/11, the history of the War on Terror would have been different. In our view, within 24 hours of 9/11, the cities of Kandhar and Kabul would have been reduced to radioactive wastelands by Ronald Reagan, or even we guess by Bill Clinton. That would have been a fitting punishment for the Jihadis and their one billion and a half silent supporters, their co-religionists. But rather than doing this, immediately after 9/11 Dubya visited Mosques and declared "Islam is a religion of peace" (sic). What signals did that convey to the Jihadis - that the USA is scared of them and that they can re-enact another 9/11 using WMDs without risking devastating and immediate retaliation from the USA.

The democratic Presidential nominee John F Kerry or JFK for short has not yet made the mistake of declaring that "Islam is a religion of peace". We hope that if he is becomes the next occupant of the Oval Office, he goes back to the policy of crashing Cruise missiles into terrorist bases and cities, but this time with nuclear payloads. We for one, till now, favored George Bush, but are now wondering if JFK would in fact be a better option for a more resolute continuation of the war on terror.

Your comments on this report

________________________

President Bush - Please attack Iran by all means, but treat Cuba and North Korea with kid gloves

Through a spokesman, you have made a laudable statement saying that Iran would be attacked. Kudos to you. But you have also said things to this effect about Cuba. The Bay of Pigs days dear Prez are over. Today our enemies are not the commies, but the Jihadis. We should not allow our focus to get diffused. So we say, attack Iran by all means, but treat Cuba and North Korea with kid gloves.

______________________

Can the US Military take over the conduct of the War on Terror from the US Government?

Seems like an absurd question obviously from an amateur agent provocateur. A statement that will be dismissed with all the contempt it deserves. The writers of this piece would have also thought this way on reading such a statement, had it not been for the conduct of the war on terror over the last two years and especially the apologetic noises emanating from the White House and White Hall about the Abu Ghraib events. Yes we too were suitably scandalized when we saw the images. But then we are at war, and everything is fair in love and war, especially so when we are dealing with an enemy who uses foul means like abduction of civilians, slitting of throats, maiming, roasting alive, all of which is sanctioned in their “Holy Book” when fighting us unbelievers. Apart from this, their “Holy Book” also recommends stoning to death and amputation of limbs, even during peacetimes. Things are going to get worse for the Western world as the weeks and months roll by in the war against terror. The bestiality of our ghoulish enemies is going to be increasingly appalling and, every squeamishness on our part will be interpreted as our weakness.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was right when he said two years back that the unlawful combatants from the ranks of the Al Qaeda who had been captured in Afghanistan would not be eligible for the terms of the Geneva Convention. Yes indeed, and how do those who follow the same Al Qaeda outlook in Iraq suddenly become eligible for the Geneva Convention? The Geneva Convention is relevant for conventional soldiers who fight a conventional war and themselves observe the rules of the Geneva Convention for their POWs. Does the Al Qaeda adhere to the Geneva Convention? An absurd question! We know what they did to Daniel Pearl the WSJ correspondent in Pakistan. We know what they did to the American Contractors at Fallujah. We know what the suicide bombers do in Israel. We know the track record of the Jihadis for the last one thousand four hundred years. Theirs is a murderous mentality driven by their “Holy Book” the Quran, which can aptly called the Instruction Manual of Terrorism.

In face of such a beastly enemy, it is suicidal for us to feel apologetic about the mistreatment of Jihadi prisoners. Some readers may say that after all the prisoners at Abu Ghraib are civilians. We need only to remember that during World War 2, we had to bracket ordinary Germans with the Nazis and treat them likewise, as we did during the carpet bombing of Dresden. We also need to be relentless in waging an ideological war by condemning the Quran outright as we condemned the Mein Kamph. The Mein Kamph was followed by a few hundred thousand Nazis, but the Quran with all its murderous injunctions is not just followed, but is held sacrosanct and inviolable by a billion and a half Muslims. We need to be bold to condemn the Quran rather than parroting the foolish and self-deceiving broken record that “Islam is a religion of peace”.

The Bush administration has been singularly pusillanimous, (with the possible exception of Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney), in displaying iron resolve in fighting the War on Terror. The Democratic wannabe, John Kerry, promises to be no better, if no worse – hopefully! Every sign of weakness on part of President Bush and Colin Powell, emboldens the Jihadis. We are not serving our cause, by being so abysmally apologetic with the events at Abu Ghraib. Rather, when the Abu Ghraib photos were released, we should have said that we shall spare no means to break the “will to kill” of our enemies. This would have earned us the respect of our allies and the fear of our enemies.

We are sure that the powers that be in the armed forces of Western countries are watching the failure of the democratic system in saving Western civilization from the Jihadi threat. We know that General Tommy Franks, the liberator of Iraq and Afghanistan, had said that a WMD attack anywhere in the West, could lead to the American Constitution being suspended and the militarization of the USA. We guess and hope that other minds in the Royal (British) Armed Forces, the French, German, Spanish and other Western militaries are also thinking on these lines, to save the civilization which they are honor bound to defend from the mortal threat that it faces today from the Jihadis. It increasingly appears that the only savoir of Western societies are Western Militaries. And Western militaries can operate unhindered, only if the slow moving democratic form of government is temporarily suspended in favor of a military command driven form of administration. This need not startle us, since even in a normal wartime situation, all civil liberties, and peace time procedures are suspended. The situation in the unconventional War on Terror, is also a war-like one. And one like which we have never fought ever before. So we need a leader who could combine the qualities of Peter the Hermit and Richard the Lionheart to lead modern-day Knights to victory over the enemies of not just Western Civilization, but enemies of all humankind and of all human progress. We hope sagacious minds like those of General Tommy Franks, take the lead to lead us to salvation from the Jihad.

The confining of President George Bush to the Air Force One aircraft and of Vice President Dick Cheney to the Underground Mountain bunker on 9/11, was one thing which should have been continued after that fateful day and all decisions of the war should have been taken by a Military Council, only to be announced to the media by a President, commandeered by the military. Can the American Military rise to this call of duty, sometime soon in the interests of saving Civilization?

Your comments on this report

________________________

Can Western Democracies win the War on Terror

This question came to mind when we heard President Bush apologizing for the actions of the American wardens at the Abu Ghraib prison. Surprisingly, even the iron man Donald Rumsfeld was apologetic. The USA cannot be led by such attitudes. Decisive and ruthless commitment won us the War of Independence, the Civil War and World War 2 – symbolized by Hiroshima. It was with this decisive ruthlessness that the Wild West was tamed taking our frontiers from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Pusillanimity is not going to take us anywhere in the war on terror, especially at a time when the Jihadis are poised to launch a nuclear attack on us. The Black Dawn exercise at Brussels simulating a post nuclear attack scenario is only a harbinger of the state of things to come in real life, someday.

At such a juncture we need a single-minded handling of any situation. We are in the midst of a war of a type that mankind has never seen before. In this war either it will be complete victory for Western civilization or a return to an endless Dark Age under the victorious Muslims. In this context, the diffident behavior of Bush and Rummy bring to mind the question raised by none less than General Tommy Franks that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

We are not wanting to sound alarmist. But there have been events in history where the Muslims have defeated armies and nations that were far more powerful than them. It happened with the defeat of the (pre-Islamic) Meccans at the Battle of Badr by a handful of Muslims from Yathrib (the pre-islamic name for Medina), and again with the defeat of the Christian Byzantines at the Battle of Yarmuk by the Muslim Arabs in 636 and yet again with the defeat of the Persians at Qadisiya by the Muslims in 637. These victories opened up North Africa, Europe and Asia to the Muslim hordes.

What has driven smaller compact Muslim armies to victory over their larger and ponderous adversaries is their cruelty without compunction or compassion, and a fanatical rather bloodthirsty zeal to vanquish their enemy. All of this was pitted against adversaries who followed the rules of war, respect for sparing the lives of non-combatants, and a general humane approach even during warfare. This led to a string of defeats of the Byzantines, Persians, Visigoths, Chinese, Hindus and Berbers at the hands of the invading Muslims.

And now we see history repeating itself, with the apologetic American (and British) response to the Abu Ghraib events. We have started having serious doubts whether we have the right form of Govt that can deliver us victory in the War against a beastly enemy. The time is fast arriving, when we need to ask ourselves; Can Western Democracies win us the War on Terror? A question that has also been posed by none less than General Tommy Franks

The usually camera-shy Franks retired from U.S. Central Command, known in Pentagon lingo as CentCom, in August 2003, after serving nearly four decades in the Army. Franks earned three Purple Hearts for combat wounds and three Bronze Stars for valor. Known as a “soldier’s general,” Franks made his mark as a top commander during the U.S.’ successful Operation Desert Storm, which liberated Kuwait in 1991. He was in charge of CentCom when Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda attacked the United States on Sept. 11.

Franks is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.

Discussing the possible dangers posed to the U.S., Franks said that “the worst thing that could happen” is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties.

If that happens, Franks said, “... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.”

Franks then offered “in a practical sense” what he thinks would happen in the aftermath of such an attack.

“It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.”

Franks didn’t speculate about how soon such an event might take place.

So the point now is do we wait for doomsday to strike us or do we take pre-emptive measures and suspend the niceties of peacetime laws of human rights for wholesale murderers like the Jihadis, civil liberties for criminals convicted in the war on terror and lodged at prison camps like Camp X-Ray (Gitmo Bay) and Abu Ghraib? In a war situation, a federal emergency needs to be declared suspending all peacetime laws and a new war-driven constitution needs to be brought into effect. The alternative is defeat and a travesty of all times, at a cost that humankind can ill afford to pay – a Muslim victory over Western Civilization. AMEN!

Your comments on this report

______________________________

The Abu Ghraib events

We too were disturbed to see the pictures of the happenings of Abu Ghraib, and so we need to look into the root causes of these happenings. This follows the same logic, which the Arab media wanted us to look for the root causes for 9/11 and eliminate those “root causes”. The “victims” of Abu Ghraib” come from the same mindset as do those who defiled the mortal remains of American contractors at Fallujah. For all the revulsion that the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib has caused, surely it is much less horrendous and blood-chilling than that of those who burnt the American contractors, dragged their corpses through the streets and then hung them up from the girders of the bridge at Fallujah, for all to see. Yes two wrongs do not make a right, but then the fact remains that the prisoners of Abu Ghraib were not innocent angels, they were convicts and those who shared the mindset of the beastly specimens at Fallujah. And if the convicts at Abu Ghraib had been in the position of jailors and wardens and the Americans had been the prisoners, then the treatment which the Americans would have got would not be much different from what their compatriots got at Fallujah! This is our smart guess.

And if we consider the track record of the Muslims in treating the defeated non-Muslims; it is appalling. And it is so, not just during ancient times, it is so even today. And it is so not just with the non-Muslims, but also amongst Muslims themsleves. We need to remember how Saddam treated prisoners at the same Abu Ghraib prison and how convicts are stoned to death, and have they hands cut off, wherever the Shariah (Islamic penal code) is implemented.

Now to the root causes as to why Muslims treat non-Muslims and dissenting Muslims in an appalling manner. The reason lies in the Instruction manual of Terrorism, - the Quran, which all Muslims adhere to and which calls for torture to be applied to non-Muslim (Kafir) prisoners till they accept Islam. And in Muslim eyes, all Kafirs are criminals since they do not submit to allah. We need to understand this root cause for Muslim barbarism, which in turn invites the retaliatory barbarism as seen in the case of the American wardens at Abu Ghraib.

Your comments on this report

______________________

Moderchai Vanunu - the modern-day Judas

Vanunu, the Israeli nuclear technician who betrayed Israeli nuclear secrets to outsiders, wants Israel to give up its nukes, he wants UN to send inspectors to Dimona? Why Israel? Has Israel used its nukes on anyone else (in spite of sufficient reason to do so in 1971). Has there been a Chernobyl in Israel? Has Israel been immune to terrorists attacks, which may someday turn nuclear if the Al Qaeda and Hamas get their hands on dirty nukes or suitcase nukes? Vanunu (Yossi Beilin and many traitors like them who infest the Israeli Labor Party and the Shalom Achshav - Peace Now - movement) need to be behind bars for endangering the security of Israel. Vanunu should thank his stars that he is an Israeli, so that today he can walk free in Tel Aviv. Had he been an Iraqi under Saddam, his family would be laying flowers at his grave.

Your comments on this report

__________________________

The logic of collective punishment for the collective crime of terrorism

Israel deserves kudos for giving the capital punishment to the Hamas gangster Rantisi. Israel should now carry the war to the next level by strafing the funeral processions of the slain terrorists. When Israel does this, there will certainly be an outcry against the unjustified collective punishment and collective assassination. But we need not worry about this. When there is a collective crime with crowds howling for Jewish (American and all non-Muslim) blood, the response of collective punishment is the only justified and practical one for our self-preservation from the murderous Jihadis.

Your comments on this report

_____________________

'I Hereby Offer Europe a Peace Treaty' - Osama Bin Laden’s first Hudna aiming at a European surrender to Islam

"The door of peace will remain open for three months from the broadcast of this statement. Whoever rejects the peace and wants war should know that we are the men of war, and whoever wants a peace treaty and signs it, we hereby allow this peace treaty with him.

- Osama Bin Laden

In the text, what needs to be noted is Osama’s boast that “we are the men of war”. We need to realize that men of war never seek peace, they always seek war. And only if they are unable to fight the enemy, then they make a provisional peace, which in Islamic parlance is termed ‘Hudna’. The prophet of Islam, Mohammed-ibn-abdallah - the founding father of terrorism. had himself started this tradition with the treaty of Hudaibiya which was a tactical peace offer to his adversaries who were more powerful than him. They unfortunately fell for his bait. And he held on to this treaty, only till his power grew, after which he overwhelmed his enemies by violating the treaty, attacking them and giving them a choice of converting to Islam or facing persecution and tyranny.

Osama is following the same illustrious example of the founding father of terrorism, Mohammed-ibn-abdallah the prophet of Islam. In the unlikely event of the Europeans falling to Osama’s bait and pulling out troops from Iraq (and other Muslim countries), Osama’s offer would only be the beginning of threats which he would hurl at them. Threats which would become more and more humiliating and atrocious. Ultimately Osama (or any other mad-mullah who takes his place) will ask them (and the rest of the non-Muslim world) to submit to Islam or face a Muslim attack. This is what the prophet Mohammed-ibn-abdallah - the founding father of terrorism, had done with the Persian Sassanian Empire and the Christian Byzantine Empire. The Europeans need to remember this history of Islam and the notoriety of Muslim psychological terror tactics, of which Osama has fired only the first salvo with his “offer of peace” from “the men of war”.

Your comments on this report

______________________

How the Jihadi Insurgency in Iraq can ominously take not just Iraq, but the entire Middle East into a vortex of Islamic insurgency

The key to this happening is ironically equally divided between the rebellious Sunni triangle of Iraq; and its increasingly turbulent Shiite south; and ironically also in it's the relatively stable Kurdish north, the area where American policy has been most successful. If you're a Kurdish leader in northern Iraq watching the mess unfolding in the rest of the country, the questions increasingly running through your mind would be: How long before we Kurds give up on a united Iraq and choose independence? Why stay part of Iraq and risk being drawn into the out-of-control maelstrom overtaking the rest of the country?

And if Kurds break away from Iraq, that would enrage Turkey, which fears that an independent Iraqi Kurdish state would attract its own 12 million to 14 million Kurds. Iraq's fragmentation also would prove that Washington's vision of a united and democratic Iraq was a pipe dream. A restive Turkish Kurdistan, could strengthen Islamist forces in Turkey, destabilizing Turkish Democracy and weakening the secular traditions of Kemal Ataturk, pulling Turkey even further from the possibility of EU membership, giving rise to the demand for an Islamist Turkey, if not, hopefully, for a revival of the Khilafat (Caliphate) abolished by Kemal Atraturk in 1920. A Turkish civil war on the lines of what happened in Algeria cannot be ruled out entirely.

Coming back to Iraq, for the Kurds of Iraq, after decades of torture, mass executions, forced relocation and chemical attacks by Saddam Hussein's monstrous regime, the Kurds today have a chance to chart their destiny. So far, they have followed the American script. But today there are three possibilities:

- an Iraq convulsed by violence for years to come;
- a Shiite-dominated Iraq; or
- an Iraq that fragments.

The first possibility could unleash Islamist forces in Saudi Arabia (and also in the Gulf countries, Yemen, Egypt, Libya), inviting greater American involvement for stabilizing the Saudi regime with limited intervention in Egypt and elsewhere.

The second possibility of a Shiite-dominated Iraq, would strengthen Iran, inviting an American pre-emptive strike on Iran after the American Presidential elections leading to further convulsions in the wider Islamic world, especially in Pakistan.

The third possibility of an Iraq that fragments, is equally perilous, since it would destabilize Turkey. The increasing upheaval we see today makes it increasingly necessary to contemplate all the three possibilities; all of which translate to one eventuality – a Middle East in ferment. And to be buried in this chaos will be the rubble of America’s blueprint for a democratic Iraq that was to transforms the Middle East's landscape into a benign democratic zone. In this scenario, increasing American boots in the theatre of war would be self-defeating and lead to greater American casualties.

What may work is far too ruthless to contemplate – to re-enact what the allies did in Dresden in the closing years of the World War II – but would America be ready to go for this option, unless by then the Jihadis succeed in launching their much vaunted nuclear strike against the West, that they boast will upset the balance of power and re-define the parameters of victory and defeat for them and for the West. A boast yes, but not empty enough to prevent millions of civilian deaths in the West, and devastating enough to enrage the democratic world to carry the war on terror to a successful finish at a cost in terms of human lives that has become unimaginable since the days of Hiroshima.

________________________

The Fallujah murders and maiming, and the beginning of Jihadi insurgency in Iraq

The Fallujah Carnage speaks for the kind of enemy we are up against - savage, inhuman beastly. When are we gonna start to hunt them down as Prez Bush promised after 9/11? Till we show our mettle, the enemy will keep making a mockery of us and murder Americans.

Why is "shoot to kill" a legitimate option in war, as in Fallujah

Even in peacetimes, the law says that murder (or even culpable manslaughter) calls for capital punishment. So it is futile to debate if murderers like Sheikh Yassin, or Jihadis of his ilk deserve to be given the capital punishment. And since they cannot be arrested to be given the Lethal Injection or brought to the Electric Chair, it is but natural "to bring justice to them, if they cannot be brought to justice", to use our President's phrase. And in a war situation as exists today in Iraq (both in the Sunni and Shia areas), an enemy combatant has to be dealt with accordingly. If he/she cannot be captured, and poses a risk to an American marine, the enemy combatant has to be shot at, and depending on the situation also shot dead, since he cannot be made prisoner. So where is the need for the American forces to baulk, and hold their fire when tackling the murderous Jihadis?

And to the question, what are the Americans doing in Iraq, the answer is making the world safer place by fighting you Jihadis in Fallujah and Najaf, rather than in New York and Washington.

We need to learn from Israel and do a Sheikh Yassin of all the Jihadis

Israel needs our admiration for the guts it showed in doing away with Yassin. Guts which we had during our cowboy, Wild West days and which we need to re-learn now. The Sheikh was a killer and led a killer pack. He deserved to be killed. Israel would now have strafe the murderous mobs that throng the streets of Gaza and Ramallah that bay for more Israeli blood. Only this language can make sense to these brutes - be they in Gaza or Fallujah.

Your comments on this report

_______________

India needs to act smartly and dispassionately, with the USA making Pakistan a Major Non-Nato Ally (MNNA)

There is more to it than meets the eye for this American decision. Ayman Al Zawahiri, Osama Bin Laden and others are hiding in Pakistan, not in India. So the USA needs Pakistan to catch Ayman Al Zawahiri, Osama Bin Laden and others. It does not need India to do this. The USA needs to catch Ayman Al Zawahiri, Osama Bin Laden and others before the US Presidential elections. So the need is pretty urgent. India needs to understand the American need, especially that of President Bush in view of the elections.

The best bet for India is to grin and bear it. And to play along with the circumstances, India can compliment President Musharraf for manfully cornering the Al Qaeda leader Ayman (or whosoever it is in that Waziristan enclave). India can also lend moral support to Musharraf in his war on the Al Qaeda and in the process achieve both embarrassment for Musharraf and further anger the Al Qaeda against Pakistan. This is India’s best bet in the given circumstances.

And going by the MNNA status, it means nothing much. Israel does not have it while Thailand does. The MNNA tag is meant to bring in more marginal countries into giving men and intelligence for the War on Terror. And at the present juncture, it is Pakistan that can play a stellar role by capturing Ayman, Osama, Mullah Omar etc, i.e. if the treacherous Pakis really do hand over these star Jihadis to the USA. Chances are that the Pakis will play a double game and not handover any of these to the USA, they may give in some small fry to the US, but Uncle Sam will be left in the lurch as far as the Big Fish are concerned.

Even if we assume that Musharraf really wants to hunt down Ayman for the statement he made against Musharraf, Pakistani troops, especially the ones on the lower rungs of the Pak army have strong sympathies for the star Jihadis. So the US game-plan could come unstuck. But anyway by holding the carrot of MNNA status before Pakistan and alternating it with the stick of secret admonitions for nuclear proliferation; we need not try too hard to guess who is being made an ass! India’s time to partner tangibly with the USA will come – but it needs to be patient and play along for the time being. Long term interests of both the USA and India, demand this from India.

________________

A question to the Socialist victors of the Spanish Elections

With the Victory of the Socialist opposition in Spain, the talk is about bringing home all the Spanish troops from Iraq. The blame for the train bombings in Madrid is being laid on the Spanish policy of joining the USA and UK in the fight against Islamic terrorism.

The socialists need to understand that even if they withdraw from the anti-terror alliance, Spain (and the entire Western world – in fact the entire non-Muslim world) will still be attacked by the Jihadis. The Jihadis are not attacking you because you are in the alliance, but because they are told by their Instruction manual of terrorism – the Quran – to attack you! And attack you they will, even if you withdraw from the alliance.

You need to remember the famous quotation "When they (Nazis) came for the democrats, I did not speak out against the Nazis; When they came for the socialists, I did not speak out against the Nazis; When they came for the Jews, I did not speak out against the Nazis; When they came for me, there was nobody to speak out against the Nazis for me!"

If you Socialists think you can buy peace with the Jihadis, then you are living in a fools paradise. This may stave off attacks for some time, but the Jihadis will attack everyone eventually, be you a capitalist, imperialist, socialist, communist or anyone else…they will attack you as long as you are not a Muslim. The best bet for the socialists to prevent attacks on Spain is to convert all Spaniards to Islam - are you socialists willing to do that to prevent further Jihadi attacks on yourself (in Spain and wherever you rule)?

_________________

Why states sponsoring Islamic Terro