Source of Pride
All Posts post a reply | post a new topic

AuthorTopic: Source of Pride
topic by
John Calvin
7/21/2002 (20:32)
 reply top
Our nation, indeed all Islamic nations as well as the meek and oppressed are pleased to see that their enemies, who are the enemies of Almighty God, of Islam and of the Holy Quran, are indeed savages who do not desist from committing any criminal acts to promote their mean purposes and who are unable to tell a friend from a foe in achieving treacherous goals. The USA is the foremost enemy of Islam. It is a terrorist state by nature that has set fire to everything everywhere and its ally, the international Zionism does not stop short of any crime to achieve its base and greedy desires, crimes that the tongue and pen are ashamed to utter or write. The stupid idea of a Greater Israel ...(36) urges them to commit any shameful crime. The Islamic nations and the mustazafeen (the meek, the oppressed) peoples of the world are pleased to have Hussein of Jordan (37) a professional, itinerant criminal, Hasan of Morocco ...(38) and Hosni Mubarak ...(39) of Egypt, fellow-mangers of Israel, as enemies. These are fellow-criminals with Israel and commit any act of treason against their own nations to serve the USA. We cheer to have Saddam, the Aflaqi ...(40) as an enemy whom friend and foe know to be a criminal, a violator of human rights and international laws and whose betrayal of the peoples of Iraq and of the Persian Gulf Emirates, has been no less than his betrayal of our country and people. We and the oppressed peoples of the world are delighted to be objects of criminal accusations by the superpowers through the international mass media under their control.

What can be a better source of pride than the fact that the USA with all its military might, its boastfulness, its claims, its mass media and its allies among puppet regimes, has been so dumbfounded and disgraced in its dealings with the dauntless Iranian nation and the land of His Holiness Baqiyatullah (a title of the 12th infallible imam, Hazrat Mahdi (AS) who is now in occultation) that it does not know which way to turn and who to turn to?!! This is not the work of anyone or anything except divine assistance that has awakened nations, particularly the Iranian Muslim nation and has guided it from darkness into light: The Light of Islam.

I now take this opportunity to advise the oppressed and noble nations, including our own, to stay firmly on this divine straight path that leads neither to the atheistic (Mulhid) East nor to the oppressive, pagan West, but to the path which the Almighty God has decreed for us. I further advise not to be negligent even for a single moment in being grateful for this blessing. Let no polluted hand of a superpower, or its agents, whether domestic or foreign, affect your determination and will. Know that the rowdier the Eastern or Western satanic power gets, the more proof it is for your divine support and God shall reward and punish the deserving ones in the best fashion in this and in the other worlds. 'Truly, He is the Lord of all blessing and in His hand lies the dominion over all things'.(The Quran, Sura 23, AI-Muminun, the Believers, verse 88).


Ruhollah Al-Musavi Al-Kbomeini
reply by
Infidel Louis
7/21/2002 (20:56)
 reply top
What is it the Muslims want? What is it they want to do with America and with Israel and Europe?

Sincere and informed answers only, please.
reply by
Richard Marvel
7/21/2002 (21:43)
 reply top
Louis,

You ask the Million Dollar Question. The mullahs of Iran reject Western society, but where is their utopian society to replace it? After all, you can't eat the Koran. You've got to have an economic model, a model for dealing with social problems, an organized, functional government, etc... They have none of these things. All they've done successfully in 20 years is create hatred, war, death and economic depravity for the Iranian people. The U.S. is clearly not the enemy of Iran. We've demonstrated that on many occassions, most recently the earthquake there, but the mullahs are desparate for an external enemy. Where one doesn't exist, they'll invent it. Clinton made many overtures to Khatami's government that were summarily rejected, so the distance between us is their doing not ours.

As I posted last week, they're just now allowing Persian cultural expression once more after 20 years, yet options for young people to associate are few, and there is NO mingling of the sexes allowed. Human nature being what it is, the youngsters have developed elaborate hand signals to communicate their amorous desires on the streets. Is this beyond ridiculous in the year 2002.

What they've done is create an Islamic aristocracy in which appointments to important positions are based on a man's Islamic identity, not ability. 'Death To America'? I say death to these arrogant, fascist thugs who shove their sanctimonious crap down the throats of the people of Iran, whether they like it or not.
reply by
Lynette
7/21/2002 (21:51)
 reply top
Richard- Islamic countries need to separate religion from the affairs of State. Until that is done,these countries will always suffer under their radical thinkers. Israel has the same 'problem'. Zionism has literally transplanted itself over the top Talmudic religion and Israel's leaders run the country on Zionist lines and principals. Your Zionist radicals virtually run the country and that is why Israel is in the mess it is in today.
reply by
Richard Marvel
7/21/2002 (21:56)
 reply top
You're right, Lynnette, but there is some question as to whether Islamic societies can successfully separate church and state. It certainly hasn't worked in Pakistan, and Turkey only succeeded because Ataturk was brutal on the Islamists. However, Turkey is once more being challenged by them, and the next election could even put them in power. That could turn the tables on Turkish support for an invasion of Iraq. A very under-reported story.

What about it folks, can Islamic societies cope with the principle of church/state separation?
reply by
truth
7/21/2002 (22:33)
 reply top
so , talmudian marvel .. muslims should go secular ??? just like the us ?????????


Giving U.S. Military More Power at Home Debated

July 21, 2002 02:22 PM ET Email this article Printer friendly version





WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A leading U.S. Senate Democrat said on Sunday he supported expanding military police powers at home on a limited basis to protect the country against terrorist strikes.

The question was discussed on a number of Sunday talk shows in light of the administration request last week for a review of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and other laws that sharply restrict the military's ability to participate in domestic law enforcement. Any changes would be subject to congressional approval.

Sen. Joseph Biden, a Delaware Democrat and member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he had previously backed legislation to allow the military, which has expertise in such matters as weapons of mass destruction, to be called in.

'I think it is time to revisit it,' he told the 'Fox News Sunday' program. 'We have to take a look at it, and I think it has to be amended. But we're not talking about general police power. ... We shouldn't go overboard.'

Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge told CNN's 'Late Edition' that there has been no discussion of giving military authorities additional arrest powers 'as a part of the homeland security future.'

'What has been discussed is the civilian support by the military in the event of rather unusual circumstances,' Ridge said, not unlike authority he exercised as governor of Pennsylvania to call in the National Guard in emergency.

Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, sounded a note of reservation, telling the CNN program while 'it's never a problem to study something ... that law has served us well.'

'We should not assume that we are going to need to change it,' Levin said.

Established after the Civil War in response to federal troops enforcing laws in the South, the law restricts military forces from performing domestic law enforcement duties, such as policing. It has been amended over the years to allow the military to lend equipment to domestic authorities, assist in drug interdiction, protect national parks and execute health quarantines.

ARREST POWERS

Critics worry it could be expanded to give Army or Air Force personnel or the National Guard arrest powers like local policemen. As the law stands, Biden said military officers called in for an emergency like a weapon of mass destruction in an Amtrak tunnel would not be allowed to use their weapons.

Air Force Gen. Ralph Eberhart, who will be heading the new North American Command, told The New York Times on Sunday he would favor changes in the law to give greater domestic powers to the military to protect against terrorist attacks. The general said he had no specific changes in mind.

'We should always be reviewing things like the Posse Comitatus and other laws if we think it ties our hands in protecting the American people,' Eberhart told the Times in a seeming break with long-standing reservations in the military to take on such expanded roles.

As recently as May, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the Pentagon would not seek changes in the law and the legal review contained in President Bush's new plan for domestic security announced last week surprised many senior officers and Pentagon officials, the Times said.

Ridge told Fox the general was 'basically saying that we need to go back and revisit how the Department of Defense supports the civilian authorities in times of crisis.'

Sen. Fred Thompson, a Tennessee Republican, said no one was suggesting the military be engaged in making arrests, rather that they be used for better surveillance along the borders and other such tasks.

'It might be an idea whose time has come,' Thompson said

reply by
Mediocrates
7/22/2002 (1:26)
 reply top
Three weeks after the Twin Towers attack on September 11, the prestigious Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram published an article in which the writer hoped that 'with the collapse of the city of globalization, it's possible to dare to predict that the whole theory of globalization will be buried with it.'

Dr. Esther Webman, from Tel Aviv University's Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies and Research Fellow at the Institute for the Study of Anti-Semitism says: 'Globalization is viewed in the Arab world as an economic threat, and as the continuation of the Western colonialist enterprise of exploiting the Arab world. But more than anything else, it is viewed as a social-cultural threat, of imposing Western culture on the Muslim world, and the undermining of the family values of Muslim society.'

Just as radical Islamic thinkers identify globalization with the United States, so too Israel and Jews generally are thought to pose the danger of regional domination. Israel is seen as the lever by which the loathed Western values are disseminated in the Middle East.

Hezbollah's spiritual leader, Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, has warned in the past that 'the world Jewish movement has labored to expropriate from Israel its present positions of strength. Jews want to control the Muslim world's economic potential and resources, and they want to weaken it spiritually with respect to the Jerusalem question, and geographically, as regards the question of Palestine.'

As Sheikh Fadlallah sees it, the struggle against Israel is a wide cultural battle, and is not limited to the political or military contest for pieces of turf in Palestine.

Ibrahim Ghosheh, formerly the spokesman for the Hamas movement, claimed in the early 1990s that if compromise were to be forged between Israel and the Arabs, 'Israel would rule in the region just as Japan dominates south-east Asia, and all the Arabs will turn into the Jews' workers.'

Regional conspiracy

Hence the array of arguments used to substantiate radical Islamic contempt for Israel has added a new component - and it could be that this point is the most potent anti-Israel barb of them all. The Islamic extremists berate Israel as an agent of Western globalization seeking regional domination.

Dr. Webman says that the extremist Islamic wing of the Arab world views the peace process in this context. 'A'adal Hussein, the editor of the pro-Islamic Egyptian newspaper Al-Shanb, who is himself a vehement critic of globalization, published in 1999 a series of articles in his newspaper in which he depicted the normalization process with Israel as a new conspiracy hatched by the `Zionist-American' alliance, and designed to penetrate and wrest control of Arab economies,' she says.

Arab intellectuals also express the concern that the Israeli-Arab conflict loses its centrality on the world stage due to the impact of the globalization process. Due to this loss of centrality, Arab political demands lose their potency.

The widespread idea in the west, by which world politics today is depicted as a 'clash of civilizations' (according to a theory devised by the American researcher Samuel Huntington long before September 11), is taken by Arab intellectuals as a ploy devised to view Islam as an inexorable foe of Christianity.

The clash of civilizations model is attacked in Arab discourse as an idea fabricated under the influence of the 'Zionist lobby,' even though Huntington himself is not Jewish.

'In Israel, many thought that once we brought up the idea of a `new Middle East,' and proposed the idea of economic and technological progress to the Arab world, the whole region would embrace us,' says Prof. Dina Porat, head of Tel Aviv University's Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-Semitism and Racism. 'In reality, the Arab world actually views this idea as a threat.'

Maligned trend

Islamic Fundamentalism today represents one of the most prominent elements in resistance to globalization; and the Jews, not only Israelis, are seen by Muslim Fundamentalists as the vanguard of the detested globalization process. This association of the Jew with a maligned global trend invariably leads to propaganda and discourse that is laden with anti-Semitism. Dr. Avi Becker, Secretary-General of the World Jewish Congress, explains that such propaganda exploits and distorts the fact that many Jews hold key position in the world economy. Such critics of globalization, he says, 'use names such as Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan, whose decisions on interest questions effect interest rates all over the world, and World Bank President James Wolfensohn, as well as senior officials from the International Monetary Fund, such as Stanley Fischer.'

An example of these dynamics occurred a few years ago in Muslim Malyasia. The involvement of Jewish businessman George Soros in currency speculation contributed toward an economic slide in the country. Malyasia's Prime Minister Mohammed Mahathir did not limit his criticism to Soros; instead he spoke about 'Jews who determine our currency levels, and bring about the collapse of our economy.'

The association between globalization and the Jew rests, of course, on the familiar image of the Jew as the ruler of the world's economy. 'This is an image which is familiar from the `Protocols of the Elders of Zion,' explains Webman, 'and so it is easy [for anti-Semites] to connect the current process to the old Jewish-Zionist scheme to dominate the world's economy.'

It bears mention that not just Islamic extremists, but also leftist movements' activities in the west against globalization rely on a strident anti-Israeli ideology which periodically lapses into outright demonstrations of anti-Semitism. For instance, Becker reports that in many anti-globalization rallies protesters carry placards that compare Israel to Nazi Germany.

Babbling Bove

Three days of demonstrations last April in Washington timed in sync with World Bank and IMF conferences turned into large pro-Palestinian rallies. One of the symbols of the anti-globalization crusade, the French farmer Jose Bove, known for his attack against a McDonald's branch in France, has gone as far as to accuse Israel of orchestrating acts of vandalism against synagogues in France.

It would appear that despite obvious differences between the left in Europe and radical Islamic thinkers, anti-globalization displays by both groups are animated by hostility to the United States and its growing domination around the globe.

Porat identifies another context which helps account for the left's hostility to globalization and Israel. 'During the last decade, the question of immigration has erupted in the west,' Porat explains, 'and this was after a period of many years in which the issue almost ceased to exist. The collapse of the Communist bloc brought a new wave of immigrants from the former Communist states to the west, and these joined a large wave of newcomers from Africa. As a result, countries in the west had to deal with tough questions about immigration; and left organizations in these countries focused their activity on legislation, and anti-racism campaigns. In this context, Israel was perceived as a racist state.'

Whether there are viable, ongoing links between these two seemingly disparate flanks in the anti-globalization crusade, the new left and Islamic Fundamentalism, is an interesting question. At first, it would appear that there is no such connection, and the two protests have different intents and motives. Large rallies staged by the left against globalization are held mainly in conjunction with events perceived as emblems of the process - the demonstrations take place against the background of G-8 meetings, or World Bank and IMF gatherings. Muslim protesters are hard to find in such protest rallies. On the other hand, European leftists are hardly major contributors to radical Islamic journals.

Left and leftist

Nevertheless, there are some connections linking the Islamic and leftist critics of globalization. Becker explains: 'Palestinians, for example, have in recent years identified the sensitivity felt in parts of the world toward American domination, and they have created an association between their struggle and the general question of globalization.' This explanation accounts for the appearance of pro-Palestinian placards at anti-globalization rallies staged in the west.

Porat argues that the Durban conference was a symbol of this connection. 'Durban,' she says, 'was a clear emblem of this connection between the left and Islam, [and the alliance] suddenly found that the subject of racism, to which the conference was devoted, served as a convenient arena for cooperative attacks against Israel. For the Arabs, this was an extraordinary opportunity to raise the question of Palestinians in an international forum.'

In this connection, Becker refers to an 'unholy alliance between, on the one hand, some of the most dubious regimes in the world, belonging to Arab and Muslim states, and, on the other hand, some of the most enlightened organizations, in the name of the joint struggle against globalization.'

Mira Assau has been active for several years in 'Green Action,' an Israeli organization which is active in the campaign against globalization. She makes an effort to take part in international anti-globalization events; when such participation isn't feasible, she sponsors activity in Israel undertaken concurrently with large demonstrations overseas. She insists that anti-globalization activity conveys no anti-Semitic messages. 'On the contrary: our activity, and activity undertaken by parallel organizations around the world derives from a world view that opposes any form of racism and hatred of others. True, there are neo-Nazi groups which are trying to `ride the bandwagon' and exploit our activity, claiming that globalization is driven by Jewish aspirations to rule the world. But such groups are not partners in the general activity against globalization; and our organizations denounce them, and demonstrate against them,' explains Assau.

Sharon's best

Assau doesn't believe that placards which compare the Star of David and swastikas constitute anti-Semitic agitation. 'On the contrary,' she declares. 'This is an act of defiance against racism, and against the racist policies of the government of Israel. In no way is it against the Jewish people.'

Naomi Klein, a Jewish journalist from Canada, has become a symbol of the anti-globalization campaign thanks to the publication of her book 'No Logo.' Among other claims, Klein argues that advertisement-based western commercial culture is propped by multi-national companies which attain the brunt of their power thanks to the exploitation of cheap labor in Third World countries. In an article entitled 'Sharon's Best Weapon,' published after the anti-globalization rallies held in Washington in April, which became a platform for pro-Palestinian agitation, she warned her comrades against staying silent in the face of trends of rising anti-Semitism.

She demanded that anti-globalization activists combat anti-Semitism with the same energy and determination they display in the fight against any form of racism. Klein wrote: 'I couldn't help thinking about all the recent events I've been to where anti-Muslim violence was rightly condemned, but no mention was made of attacks on Jewish synagogues, cemeteries and community centers ... The anti-globalization movement isn't anti-Semitic, it just hasn't fully confronted the implications of diving into the Middle East conflict... But it is possible to criticize Israel while forcefully condemning the rise of anti-Semitism. And it is equally possible to be pro-Palestinian independence without adopting a simplistic `pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel' dichotomy.'

Assau doesn't agree with this analysis. 'Movements which battle globalization are not silent about anti-Semitism,' she says. 'In September 2000, when we demonstrated in Prague in front of IMF and World Bank meetings, there was also a rally held by neo-Nazis, and our people held a special demonstration against them [the neo-Nazis]. A day is devoted at our conferences to the struggle against all forms of prejudice in the world, including anti-Semitism, though as we see it anti-Semitism is directed not only against Jews, but also against Muslims. The problem is that the media rarely report on our activity in this connection, and that's what causes the mistaken impression that we are apathetic about this question' of anti-Semitism
reply by
muslim
7/22/2002 (2:23)
 reply top
IT IS AMAZING To me that even after the HUGE SCANDAL of what those michiavillian psudo jews did to the american economy under the name of globalization ... that some retard still have the balls to post that last article defending it and showing the arab world as ignorant and retarded for catching on to its dangers on a society that STIL maintain some family values and faith!!!!
there is an old arab proverb that says ' if you have no shame you can do anything'.
I guess it is true..amazing how stupid some people think MER readers are.!
the entgire modern science was born out of that muslim world .. and history books are not deleted still!!! comparing western civilization to the muslim world civilization is like comparing microsoft to apple .. some people invent and some people make an art out stealing other poeples inventions and spining and whealing and dealing it into a monopoly!!!
reply by
ADAM
7/22/2002 (4:17)
 reply top
MUSLEM, THE PROBLEM W/ ISLAMIC WORLD IS THAT THEY HAV'NT DONE ANYTHING. THAT IS ANYTHING GOOD, OFCOURSE!!!
reply by
Fries with that order sir?
7/22/2002 (8:34)
 reply top
it is AMAZING to me that muslim assholes like 'muslim' above think that can silence truth in order to justify their Islamic inferiority complex.

LMAO - Israel is tiny compared to the Arab world, yet Israel has contributed more in her 60 years than the Arab world has contributedd in the last 400.

It is the truth. No matter how much you assholes lie.

Perhaps your ancient ancestors had it going on, but you buffons sure don't!
reply by
John Calvin
7/22/2002 (17:20)
 reply top
Muslim seems to be the only one with an inkling of what he/she is talking about. The rest by varying degrees are complete blockheads!!!