(Thanks to Aleon)
Daily Archives: December 8, 2005
As I treated here, Ahmadenijad’s reflections are really a danger, not only for his people, but for all the world. And Germany, France and Great Britain thought that he was going to be appeassed. Well, ejem, NO. And here is his new suggestion:
Iran’s official IRNA news agency reported Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s comments, made at a news conference in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
“Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces and they insist on it to the extent that if anyone proves something contrary to that they condemn that person and throw them in jail,” said Ahmadinejad, according to IRNA.
“Although we don’t accept this claim, if we suppose it is true, our question for the Europeans is: Is the killing of innocent Jewish people
by Hitler the reason for their support to the occupiers of Jerusalem?”
“If the Europeans are honest they should give some of their provinces in Europe – like in Germany, Austria or other countries – to the Zionists and the Zionists can establish their state in Europe. You offer part of Europe and we will support it,” he said.
I do not think this piece of news needs any more comments except that they are only months away from building the nuclear bomb (except that this next photo appears on the web page from TF1 the French public channel)
This much-delayed vote was the latest Kremlin bid to show that, after a decade of war with Chechen separatists that has left perhaps 100,000 dead and many more displaced from their homes, Chechnya is on its way to normality. By Russian standards, in some ways the election was indeed normal. Discounting the gang of voters that seemed to track a group of foreign journalists as they travelled between polling stations (at each of which traditional Chechen dancing magically broke out on cue), turnout appeared thin. Not everyone was enthusiastic: “death, hunger and destruction” was all that Chechnya’s post-Soviet leaders had given it, said one man on the outskirts of Grozny, Chechnya’s capital, who had crossed out all the names on his ballot paper.
Nevertheless the official turnout was over 60%, and—surprise!—United Russia, the Kremlin’s pet party, took around 60% of the votes. Nothing abnormal there, at least in Russian terms. But what distinguishes Chechnya’s election is the plethora of guns—and the war that the Kremlin misleadingly claims is over, and the rest of the world has largely forgotten.
Friends like these
The separatists who hide out in Chechnya’s southern mountains continue to clash with Russian forces, and to pay local youths who bomb Russian installations and can supply video evidence to prove it. Russians are still dying in large, if sketchy, numbers. But Mr Putin’s policy of “Chechenisation” has meant outsourcing most of the violence to local militias—especially the kadyrovtsy, who on most estimates number around 7,000. Many, like the Kadyrov family itself, are former rebels. “I was sitting at home,” comments one, with a smile, when asked what he did before joining the militia.
Officially, Mr Kadyrov junior is Chechnya’s first-deputy prime minister, and his militia’s job is to fight terrorism. In reality, and although the perpetrators are often hard to identify (and drunken Russian soldiers still murder people too), human-rights workers reckon that the kadyrovtsy are now responsible for many of the region’s outrages: mass kidnappings, the extraction of meaningless confessions and incriminations under torture, and killings. They answer only to Ramzan, and, usually, there is no redress. “To whom?” asks one torture victim in Grozny, when asked whether he has ever complained.
It is not surprising that most people at the polling stations said that ending the war, which is officially over already, was one of the country’s two top priorities. The other is jobs. Salaries for the kadyrovtsy begin at 14,000 roubles ($485) a month—five times what Tamara, a teacher with four children who was bombed out of her home in the village of Gorogorsk, says she earns. Besides a few roadside shacks and some shepherds, there is little economy to speak of outside Grozny, and unemployment is almost total. There are a few signs of life in the capital; but the city is still a wasteland of abandoned rubbish, stray dogs and half-bombed, half-inhabited apartment blocks, with washing strung across the shell holes and decorated by giant posters of Ramzan receiving his hero’s medal from Mr Putin.
“This is how I introduce myself,” says Movsar Temirbaev, the city’s mayor. “As mayor of the most destroyed city in the world.” There are more cars on the streets, it is said, only because after bombed-out Chechens have paid the 30-50% kickback needed to extract the federal compensation to which they are entitled, the cash does not stretch to a new apartment. Along with embezzlement, local money-spinners include pilfering of oil, trade in stolen military kit and ransoms, sometimes for live kidnap victims, sometimes for corpses. “It’s none of our business,” says a man in the village of Gvardeiskoe, when asked where the money came from for the incongruously grand houses nearby.
Will the newly elected parliamentarians make any difference? “Only to themselves,” says one Grozny resident. The reason, as Andreas Gross, of the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe, puts it, is that “the real power [in Chechnya] is not with the elected authorities.” In a pre-election poll, 2% of Chechens said the election results would be determined by the voters; 9% said by Mr Putin; 72% said by Ramzan Kadyrov. Next year, when he turns 30—the age that Chechnya’s constitution prescribes as the minimum for its president—Mr Kadyrov’s de facto power may become official. The new parliament’s main job, say some Chechens, will be to approve his nomination by Mr Putin as president.
It is hard to find many reasons for hope that Chechnya will get any better. Alu Alkhanov, who took over as Chechnya’s president from Mr Kadyrov senior, said this week in Grozny that he was willing to meet followers of Aslan Maskhadov, an ex-president turned rebel leader who was killed in March (given his predecessors’ nasty fates and Ramzan’s impending birthday, Mr Alkhanov would do well to plan a retirement strategy). But there are few credible, moderate leaders left. A few recently demobbed separatists ran in the election; one, Magomed Khambiyev, is said to have turned himself in after several relatives were kidnapped. Mr Khambiyev stood for the Union of Right Forces, a liberal party whose strongish showing was the election’s only semi-surprise. But no active separatists took part.
Conversely, it is quite easy to see how things might get a lot worse. Mr Putin’s Chechnya policy amounts to a gamble on Ramzan Kadyrov’s loyalty. It is a risky bet—not just for the benighted Chechens, nor only because the paramilitaries’ abominations drive some young people to join the separatists as their best chance of vengeance. Russian soldiers in Chechnya say that the kadyrovtsy already clash often, and violently, with federal troops, as well as with official Chechen police. In the end, concludes one gloomy Russian lieutenant, “there will be another war”—this time, quite possibly, against a foe whom the Kremlin itself has succoured.
The problem with Russia is that we do not know what to think about its international position.
Firstly, because of his relations with Saddam’s Iraq
Of course Russia opposed the Iraqi War, and a lot of important Russians have been indicted in the Oil For Food Scandal.
It has also asked USA to leave Kirjizstan and Uzbekistan with China to “protect oil resources”. That is very funny, as China is today the world’s leading consumer on oil resources.
It’s also striken me that, Yevgeni Adamov, the former Russian Energy Minister, is fighting extradition to the United States, accused of fraud and money laundering of more than $9million that USA gave Russia to protect Russian nuclear facilities.
So, can we trust Russia?
“MSNBC News Services
The posting was a full version of a video by al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri that was issued on Sept. 19, excerpts of which were broadcast by the Arab television network Al-Jazeera at the time. The network aired more excerpts Wednesday, originally presenting them as newly issued footage. A newscaster later told viewers the video was old.
“I call on the holy warriors to concentrate their campaigns on the stolen oil of the Muslims, most of the revenues of which go to the enemies of Islam,” said al-Zawahri, the Egyptian deputy of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
“The enemies of Islam are exploiting such vital resources with incomparable greed, and we have to stop that theft with all we can and save this fortune for the nation of Islam,” said al-Zawahri, who was wearing a white robe and black turban and was seated before a pale blue sheet, speaking to an off-camera interviewer.
“I bring a message of joy to all Muslims and mujahedeen that al-Qaida is spreading, expanding and strengthening. Its prince Sheikh Osama bin Laden is still leading its jihad (holy war),” he said.
Call for Iraqi groups to unite
In the full version of the tape, which was posted on an Islamic Web site known for carrying statements from extremist groups, al-Zawahri called on Iraqi insurgent groups to unite.
Iraqi Arabs, Kurds and Turkomen, “whose hands were not tainted by Americans,” should come together to fill “the gap that will be left by the Americans departure” from Iraq, he said.
When it aired excerpts Wednesday, Al-Jazeera’s newscaster said they came from the “latest al-Zawahri video.”
The full video includes quotes from al-Zawahri on September elections in Afghanistan and on the July 7 London bombings that appeared in the excerpts aired by Al-Jazeera on Sept. 19.
(article by Andrew G. Boston on The American Thinker)
[Part II of this article appears tomorrow]
Violent jihad warfare on infidels is the norm, not the exception, in Islamic history. Once successful, jihad leads to the imposition of humiliating, degrading, violent, and expensive oppression under dhimmitude, the institutionalized imposition of lowly status upon those who refuse to abandon their faith and adopt Islam. Among the worst victims of jihad and dhimmitude have been the Jews and Christians who lived in historic Palestine.
Edward Said’s ridiculous polemic, The Question of Palestine, quotes the following observation by a Dr. A. Carlebach published in Ma’ariv (October 7, 1955).
The danger stems from the [Islamic] totalitarian conception of the world… Occupation by force of arms, in their own eyes, in the eyes of Islam, is not at all associated with injustice. To the contrary, it constitutes a certificate and demonstration of authentic ownership. 
Said cites Carlebach with ostensibly self-evident derision. Unwittingly, Said thus reveals his own belligerent obliviousness to Carlebach’s acute perceptions about the ugly realities of jihad war, the resultant imposition of dhimmitude, and their brutal legacy in historical Palestine and the greater Middle East.
As elucidated by Jacques Ellul, the jihad is an institution intrinsic to Islam, and not an isolated event, or series of events:
.. .it is a part of the normal functioning of the Muslim world… The conquered populations change status (they become dhimmis), and the shari’a tends to be put into effect integrally, overthrowing the former law of the country. The conquered territories do not simply change ‘owners’. 
The essential pattern of the jihad war is captured in the great Muslim historian al-Tabari’ s recording of the recommendation given by Umar b. al-Khattab to the commander of the troops he sent to al-Basrah (636 C.E.), during the conquest of Iraq. Umar reportedly said:
Summon the people to God; those who respond to your call, accept it from them, (This is to say, accept their conversion as genuine and refrain from fighting them) but those who refuse must pay the poll tax out of humiliation and lowliness. (Qur’an 9:29) If they refuse this, it is the sword without leniency. Fear God with regard to what you have been entrusted. 
Jihad was pursued century after century, because jihad, which means “to strive in the path of Allah,” embodied an ideology and a jurisdiction. Both were formally conceived by Muslim jurisconsults and theologians from the 8th to 9th centuries onward, based on their interpretation of Qur’anic verses and long chapters in the Traditions (i.e., “hadith”, acts and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, especially those recorded by al-Bukhari [d. 869] and Muslim [d. 874] ). 
Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), jurist (Maliki), renowned philosopher, historian, and sociologist, summarized these consensus opinions from five centuries of prior Muslim jurisprudence with regard to the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad:
In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force… The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense… Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations. 
Indeed, even al-Ghazali (d. 1111), the famous theologian, philosopher, and paragon of mystical Sufism, (who, as noted by W.Montgomery Watt, has been ”.. .acclaimed in both the East and West as the greatest Muslim after Muhammad.. .” ), wrote the following about jihad:
…one must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a year…one may use a catapult against them [non-Muslims] when they are in a fortress, even if among them are women and children. One may set fire to them and/or drown them…If a person of the Ahl al- Kitab [People of The Book -Jews and Christians, typically] is enslaved, his marriage is [automatically] revoked…One may cut down their trees… One must destroy their useless books. Jihadists may take as booty whatever they decide…they may steal as much food as they need… 
By the time of the classical Muslim historian al-Tabari’s death in 923, jihad wars had expanded the Muslim empire from Portugal to the Indian subcontinent. Subsequent Muslim conquests continued in Asia, as well as Eastern Europe. The Christian kingdoms of Armenia, Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, and Albania, in addition to parts of Poland and Hungary, were also conquered and Islamized.
Arab Muslim invaders engaged, additionally, in continuous jihad raids that ravaged and enslaved Sub-Saharan African animist populations, extending to the southern Sudan. When the Muslim armies were stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683, over a millennium of jihad had transpired. These tremendous military successes spawned a triumphalist jihad literature. Muslim historians recorded in detail the number of infidels slaughtered, or enslaved and deported, the cities and villages which were pillaged, and the lands, treasure, and movable goods seized. Christian (Coptic, Armenian, Jacobite, Greek, Slav, etc.), as well as Hebrew sources, and even the scant Hindu and Buddhist writings which survived the ravages of the Muslim conquests, independently validate this narrative, and ,complement the Muslim perspective by providing testimonies of the suffering of the non-Muslim victims of jihad wars. 
To continue reading, click here.