"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address:

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

Going to the Source: Al-Sadr's Puppet Masters

Al-Sadr's Puppet Masters Al-Sadr's Puppet Masters, By Claude Salhani,The Washington Times, August 24, 2004

I do not know what the Arabic word for appeasement is, so forgive my license when I refer to us as Dar-al-Appeasement, or Look Where the Chickens Have Come Home to Roost.

Looking back on the history of all of this roiling Islamism, we see an ebb and flow from Islam's beginning. Call the ebb and flow a pendular swing between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. Now the stakes are higher because the weapons are more severe, but the problem is still the same.

The swing to orthodoxy got underway big time in 1928 in Egypt with the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood. It grew and spawned other groups under the fueling by Saudi Wahhabism and oil money. At the same time, an evil human named Ruhollah Khomeini dreamed, Hitler-style, of total Islamism in Iran and all lands beyond.

The West not only blinked and caved in over the Suez Canal, but also over the locals' demands to seize the oil fields which had been discovered and developed by several Western interests. You never blink or give in to an Islamist: but the West did not learn; thus, they emboldened the fanatics. It works every time it is tried. And, by the way, they still have not learned this.

Enter Jimmy Carter whose contemptable mind got the Shah of Iran overthrown and Khomeini established as totalitarian ruler of Iran. Jimmy Carter was fool enough to think that his dime store Christianity would impress Khomeini. Well, it did. Khomeini saw Carter for the fool he was and saw that the way was clear to launch radical Islam onto the world from Iran, using petrodollars to fund. Khomeini established all sorts of terror training institutes and allied himself with all of the other Islamists who regarded Israel as the worst thing since sliced bread.

Reagan blinked and caved over Lebanon and the barracks at Beirut, and later, astonishingly, by arms dealing with Iran. Khomeini turned up the heat as did the Saudis who could read the same information and get the same conclusions: The West, and particularly the USA = WEAK. Petrodollars funded the spread of Wahhabism, and they funded Hezbollah and Khomeini's global ambitions.

Bush 41 blinked and caved. The Gulf War was a travesty. We spent blood and treasure only to get a bad result and a huge worsening of our reputation among the Islamists. Remember, the Islamists respect only ruthless power and total victory. Anything short of this spells victory for them to them. We could have and should have come out of that war with that part of the world existentially fearing our displeasure.

Early in Bush 41's presidency, Khomeini died. Khomeinism did not die, nor did Hezbollah and running the biggest terrorist operations in history. It is still going strong, if not stronger; now we are letting them go nuclear.

Clinton practically gave the bad guys a red carpet, round trip tickets, and all expenses paid permanent vacations, as well as bonuses and a no-hour work-week bonanza. Islamists now concluded that the rich mansion stood unlocked, unguarded, and ripe for the plundering, while some silly would-be playboy played cigar games in the Oval Office.

Bush 43, for the good he has done regarded responding to terrorism, has failed mightily. (If Kerry succeeds Bush, expect full, active assaults on the USA; Bush is by far better than those sissy socialists and perfumed princes on the Democrat ticket.) GWB is soft on religion per se and cannot bring himself to identify the enemy in terms of the unvarnished truth. The Islamists see that. They know he attacked Iraq when he should have taken out Iran, then Saudi Arabia and Syria. They know Iran pulls the strings on world-wide Islamic terror, and they see the leaders of the USA unwilling call a spade a spade and do what is needed.

Enter Al-Sadr. Were it not for Iran, Al-Sadr would be the insignificant troll he is with his two followers. What is the meaning of Al-Sadr, and of what importance is he -- other than as a representative of poor State Department policy?

The author of this article we are citing says: "The reason is the Iran's ayatollahs are sending Washington a message. The message is "make sure that you, Washington, will convince Israel to stay away from our nuclear sites and desires." Otherwise, the fighting currently under way in Najaf can easily expand to other localities and grow in intensity. Lives are, unfortunately, expendable in this part of the world."

Why would some sub-standard wreck of a country like Iran act this way? We taught them that they could do this to us.

We restrain our sole ally, Israel, out of stupid altruistic, self-defeating motives. We join the scum who are anti-Israel by not telling them to take a hike and backing Israel morally, militarily, and with materiel. The Iranians are afraid of Israel because Israelis act like humans of self-esteem who value their survival. Our politicians and appointees do not.

The answer to terror is to take out the terror states who are solely behind the world's troubles today. It means starting with IRAN and making it a total example. It also means unleashing Israel and backing them 1000%.

To paraphrase former President Reagan, the bombing should begin in five minutes.


  • At Wed Aug 25, 08:46:00 AM PDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    george you articulate very well in your articles which i enjoy reading.

    i hope someone in the west does what is necessary to stop islam before its
    too late.

    forrest shalom


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home