Thursday, June 29, 2006

From Sahih Bukhari- Chilling

'Umar sent the Muslims to the great countries to fight the pagans. When Al-Hurmuzan embraced Islam, 'Umar said to him. "I would like to consult you regarding these countries which I intend to invade." Al-Hurmuzan said, "Yes, the example of these countries and their inhabitants who are the enemies of the Muslims, is like a bird with a head, two wings and two legs; If one of its wings got broken, it would get up over its two legs, with one wing and the head; and if the other wing got broken, it would get up with two legs and a head, but if its head got destroyed, then the two legs, two wings and the head would become useless. The head stands for Khosrau, and one wing stands for Caesar and the other wing stands for Faris. So, order the Muslims to go towards Khosrau." So, 'Umar sent us (to Khosrau) appointing An-Numan bin Muqrin as our commander. When we reached the land of the enemy, the representative of Khosrau came out with forty-thousand warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, "Let one of you talk to me!" Al-Mughira replied, "Ask whatever you wish." The other asked, "Who are you?" Al-Mughira replied, "We are some people from the Arabs; we led a hard, miserable, disastrous life: we used to suck the hides and the date stones from hunger; we used to wear clothes made up of fur of camels and hair of goats, and to worship trees and stones. While we were in this state, the Lord of the Heavens and the Earths, Elevated is His Remembrance and Majestic is His Highness, sent to us from among ourselves a Prophet whose father and mother are known to us. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."

A Polemic Against Atheism

A polemic, for those who have forgotten its meaning, is an attack. In this I will set forward none of my views, but instead impugn those of others. A common tactic used by many to attack religion, will now be turned to attack the attackers.
A man can never be reasoned out of any position which he never reasoned himself into. Thus is the root of all evil in today’s America: the doctrines of unreason yet made more insidious by masquerading as reason. At the head of these forces is the force of Atheism. This is not meant to soothe the hearts of disbelief, or to call someone to faith. I will not mince word with those who would advance the putrid banner of nihilism under the cover of a cannonade of so-called reason. Atheism as a metaphysic comes to us in a variety of forms: Music, T.V, so called “American Culture”. Atheism, first and foremost, is a religion. All forms of extremist atheism, whether they are Objectivism, Marxism, or any other ism, make metaphysical claims. These claims are never challenged nor questioned. Atheism as a religion has Ten Commandments.

They are:
1) Man consists of nothing more than atoms, hence he has no essence
2) Man should therefore seek Paradise on Earth
3) Reality must be what we see in front of us
4) Religious faith is bad; but faith in fellow man good
5) We must be the judge of whether God is righteous or not
6) Eschatology in religion bad; eschatology in science good
7) Ethical judgments cannot be made; all is relative
8) The Universe is an accident
9) Evolution can never be questioned. Prophet Darwin is unassailable
10) Faith is a stupidity, and faith must be taken as “belief in something you cannot see.”

Are they not patently absurd?

It now possible to move about in United States and hear nothing of God and nothing of his message, and therefore the forthcoming generation is cursed with ignorance. Atheism has become a dominant ideal inside the “academy”. Plato is surely rolling over in his grave. The other practices, such as “Spiritualism”, or Buddhism, smack of a true disbelief, and these offer no real substitute to Western Judeo-Christianity, and represent another facet of the Anti-Theism Crusade. These belief systems gain ascendancy in the West due to a desire to rebel, nothing more. People no longer search for merit in a religion, but are simply and pathetically clawing for something different.

Atheism is at the root of all these ideas, an unreasoned and endemic disease only cured by reason. On the side of a belief in a creator are men of reason: Locke, Leibniz, Newton, Einstein, Pascal, Descartes, Galileo, Plato, and every man, nearly ever man who has brought the light of knowledge to bear against the dark cloak of ignorance.
Francis Bacon defined the cause of Atheism in “One Atheism”:

“Lastly, this I dare affirm in knowledge of nature, that a little natural philosophy, and the first entrance into it, doth dispose the opinion to atheism. But on the other side, much natural philosophy, and wading deep into it, will bring men’s minds to religion.”

On the other side, resting in Atheism, lie the works of Nietzsche, Sartre and others. Let us simply ask ourselves, which group of men has produced more? What cultures, movements, sciences, and other great things has atheism produced? Other than Communism and millions of deaths, quite a bit of nothing. Absolutely nothing that can be in its totality declared a positive.

Thus is proven true Christ’s expression, “By your fruits you shall know them.” This was spoken by Jesus Christ, the first pragmatist, who knew that ideas have consequences. If capitalism, democracy, law and much of European history are the fruits of Christianity and Theism then what are the fruits of Atheism. Is it rotten? Is this fruit of Atheism putrid to the nose and bitter to the tongue? Then let us take an axe to this tree! Today we must consign it to the flames!

Sunday, June 25, 2006


If I call for the destruction or end of islam in our world it will undoubtably lead to people saying that I am a racist, or a bigot. This charge is thrown against anyone who does not unthinkingly and sheepishly follow the blind facade of multiculturalism. I practice discernment when looking at a culture. All are not equal. To equate the greatness of ancient India with the wandering Bantus is to debase the achievements of the Indian culture. Arab culture is something to be respected. Islamic culture is not. The Arabs themselves must learn that distinction. I do not hate the Muslim; but I hate Islam. I do hate hate the sinner; but despise utterly the sin.

Islam poisoned Arabs first. The most verdant civilization ever to rise out of the deserts of that reigion were those oy Palmyra and Petra. These cites are great wonders. The Quraysh, Muhammad's tribe, were budding capitalists. The tribal structure of Arabia lent itself to a society without government. Men were free. Great men of the enlightenment chased after this ideal. It was the pre-Islamic Arabs who had it. Enter Muhammad. I cannot repeat the tale enough. This one man, this one sick sick man, came with his dogma- and all of this great freedom ended. I encourage all who read this- go forth and find out what you can about this so-called time of ignorance. The Arabs have much to proud of. But none of it has come after Islam. Petra was not carved out of rock for the sake of Allah.

Saturday, June 24, 2006

How to Win the War

The "War on Terror" cannot be fought as it now is. The idea of the Long War is correct . America will have to learn patience to win a victory in Iraq. The insurgents must be crushed. They must be hunted like the rats they are. We must fight them until they are all lain slain upon the feilds of Al-Anbar. It will also have to unlearn some of the horrible tendencies which have crept into its military: the tendency to fight every war like politicans run elections; always looking at the opinion polls. We must look to history for answers. The study of history has no other point. We must work to stop the next attack. We have to build our military for the coming wars with Iran. More troops need to fill its ranks. The politicians have to show the guts of times past and come to a decision whether wee are ready or not for five more years of open warfare followed by twenty or so of covert war. Washington should be spending far less. For Osamas objective is stated as the collapse of our economy. He has stated that he can wear us down and we will go bankrupt. This appears to be occuring. The CIA must also be reconstituted. A covert action arm, which has already come under the Pentagon and SOCOM, must recieve all that t needs. It must be loosed upon the enemy. It must be sent to the eighty or so nations where al-Qadea has presence. Overall, we must win this war as swiftly as possible. While a ten-year war sounds long, it could be even longer. The objective, to break the enemy's center of gravity in the nations stretching from Syria to Pakistan must be achieved. After this, we will hunt their scattered bands. But the latter cannot come before the former as the enemy will be flush with recruits. To attack a foe such as this, which is more like a fire than an Army, we need new fronts. To stay static in Iraq and expect some magical victory for us and the West is insanity. The war must spread..........

Notes on Warfare

IF there exists one civilization which declares war for all time against all others, then this civilization must be eradicated. If this civilization is allowed to continue on its path it will surely kill everyone. So survival dictates that this civilization must be destroyed.

Islam has declared war against all mankind.

Trapped by empty terms such as genocide we cannot do what needs to be done. I will dispense with all pretense and go straight to the matter. If we wage war against only the able-bodied men of a nation, then the wives and children survive. If we slay the men, then the wives will raise the sons and tell them -"the evil Yankees came and killed your father. You must go and take revenge". And so on. So the war never stops. Worse yet if we only kill some of the men, as we are now. Then there is no incentive to stop sucide bombings, beheadings, and general terrorism.

The genocidal maniacs of the world must be met with genocide, lest they carry out their mad will. War is terrible. War is terrible. So it must be, lest we, or any other people grow too fond of it.

Real Torture

While we hear every week that the evil bloodthirsty Americans in Iraq are massacring and torturing, there exists real torture in the world which goes unreported.

What is the number one society for torture on earth?


The following excerpts are from an old column of Lev Navzorov:

Marco Polo, an Italian who visited China in the 13th century, the first century of the Inquisition, found that Jews and Christians practiced their religions unmolested - indeed, their temples were exempt from taxation. Books were printed for general use in political economy, philosophy, religion, warfare, painting, music and other arts.

On the other hand, Polo writes that many Chinese "always carry poison about them" to swallow if they are arrested, because no human being can expect Chinese torture without trying to commit suicide. "But the rulers, who are aware of this practice, are always provided with the dung of dogs, which they oblige the accused to swallow, causing a vomiting of the poison." ("The Travels of Marco Polo," p. 197). Incidentally, torture is practiced in China today.
The above may suffice to show the fundamental difference between the history of China and that of Christendom.

Oddly enough, over seven centuries later, not a word is said in my "Britannica" about Chinese torture. Yet the 13th-century Chinese knew about it enough to poison themselves to avoid it. "But their rulers, who are aware of this practice, are always provided with the dung of dogs, which they oblige the accused to swallow, causing a vomiting of the poison," Polo concludes.
Indeed, pao luo, used in China today, was used over 3,000 years ago. This is a torture wherein a victim is to walk along a slippery metal beam resting on burning coals. The victim "grills" his or her feet by the metal beam or slips and burns them to cinders in the burning coals. Ling chi was abolished in 1907, but is revived in China today: The victim is put to death by cutting out bits of his or her body for several days.

Thursday, June 22, 2006

Debate on Iraq Settled.......

Let all these politicians emptily huff and puff and grumble of this and that. No one takes them seriosuly. A supine and torrid mass are they. No, let us, the people, the nation, those whose minds are sick of being posioned by the insolent stupitidy of this so-called Iraq debate. Enough. I will now turn to a greater man to speak on the matter.

A godly man. A brave man, a man with a deeply mystical view of life. A man whose sense of destiny pervaded his life. A man whom Yahweh chooses to bless man with only ever so often- a great man of his generation, and a great man for all times:

"Pacifists would do well to study the Seigfreid and Maginot Lines, remembering that these defenses were forced; that Troy fell; that the walls of Hadrian succumbed; that the Great Wall of China was futile; and that, by the same token, the mighty seas which are alleged to defend us can also be circumvented by a resoluted and ingenious opponent. In war, the only sure defense is offense, and the efficency of offense depends upon the warlike souls of those conducting it."

General George S. Patton, 1945 in: WAR AS I KNEW IT

A Blurb On Total War

A recent comment to my site prompted my exposition on this subject. I will shortly lay out the philosophical and strategic principles of total warfare. This is simply an introductory to the subject. If only the generals read my blog........

For those who are truly anti-war; the soldiers, sailors and airmen, and the otherwise brave persons, the position advertised by the luckless leftist must appear utterly comedic. These service members like most soldiers of all times past hate war. This much we can know, because no man, once placed in battle, unless he be insane, grows to love combat. Because man is much more than a mere beast, killing is a terrible thing and instinctively abhorrent to his psyche. Most veterans despise war, and returns with a mountain of sorrow. If nor this, then their lives are least heavily disrupted, and they will never be the same. But most realize, with an incisive sense that only those who have been to battle, that their war is necessary. Any war, pick any war and they will find it worthwhile.
Yet they com home from the front only to see a clueless horde of Americans, no doubt drugged out and slightly disturbed, thinking they can merely wish the scourge of war away. Those with brains know one thing: human nature is such that man will always seek domination over others. Who has the better account? Those proposing a unilateral U.S. policy of “peace” or those who fight wars and support wars? Those who espouse peace but serve only the perpetuate war are the pathetic protestors. These are largely Marxist organisms, which fill Europeans streets. Occasionally the novelty of their appearance appears on American street. They largely fester on college campuses. Otherwise the Marxian Bascillus is largely marginal.
We must look to those with a better account for out war strategy. We must look to the veterans. What would they favor? More guerilla wars? Another useless Geneva Convention, a scrap of paper whose best us to our soldiers would consist in its value as a bathroom tissue? More United Nations decrees, directed at the soft west? More “liberation”? Less conquest?
If only such a thing as liberation could change the minds of those stolen away by Islam, then the world would be a better place. But I fear, and reasonably so, that years after our entry into Moslem lands, to “liberate them”, we have only delayed the inevitable terrible war.
Now the Muslim lands are weaker than the rest of the world. Now Iran has limited capability. Now terrorist groups are only small bands. Now very few Moslem states possess armies. Now they do not possess the ultimate weapon. But this is now. The Moslem world is the process of reverting to pure Islam, the most violent doctrine the planet has yet spawned. All the weakness and disunity of the Moslem will be turned around. Thus, many military officers know that our current policy is utterly impossible, as do many who can see reality as it is. Our culture, if such a thing actually existed anymore, has no more pull. We are a divided society whose values are everyday under threat from those inside our nation. So how can a thing such as democracy be exported to the lands of Islam?
Few intellectuals today would dare answer the question. For those on the Left it is simply inconceivable that we actually have an enemy. And for those on the Right it is a seperate game. Thus, stuck between two falsehoods, few intellectuals have made the courageous choice. They have chosen“courage of our convictions” instead of courage in actuality. What do I mean? Simply this: those on the right who justly believe we have a mortal enemy in Radical Islam have made the convenient choice to go along with limited war. Limited war, despite its eloquent exponents in the Green Berets and in the “Strategy” industry, is a complete failure and a farce. Every argument which is advanced to show that limited war is a superior form of war is destroyed when it is put to the test.
I do not in any way mean to demean the good intentions of George Bush. After all, conquest is noticeably absent from the curriculum at Yale. No class could accurately convey the feeling of seeing your best friends shot to death, or the warm feeling of guts in your lap. Bush simply sought the path of least resistance. Bush’s fault lays not in his decision to commit to war; nay, it lays in his decision to not prosecute that war to its logical conclusion. This is ultimately why he cannot convey his message it is because the strategy currently employed is muddled when compared with the reality of the threat we face. A real war is total.
Total war ultimately and paradoxically benefits the common people. Limited war was a doctrine cooked up by politicians, for politicians and benefiting only politicians. Limited wars never really end; victories are only Pyrrhic. Our politicians have the ultimate weapons: nuclear. But this they do not use. Everyday we are told of the threat of WMD but WMD is never deployed against the enemy. Instead a whole new ineffective government department is created, idiots put into security uniforms and told to wand all the white men, and wars fought only when a big fat P.C. stamp can be provided. What is the possible logical in this? The logic is this: In a nuclear exchange all would die, not just Ms. Smith’s son. Hence, the politicians, fearful and cowardly men all, choose to limit the war to a type in which Ms. Smith’s son will be the only one who dies. This is of course highly illogical; for the enemy we face will use nuclear weapons regardless of provocation. Who stands for the limited war doctrine? First, leftist traitors, who stand against all that is logical. Total war is logical; hence the leftist must oppose it. Second, women, who create a nice pink flowery world of their own, in which no such thing as the vaporization of thousands of so-called innocents would be necessary to defeat an enemy. Third, petty war-intellectualism, which knows nothing of war but is its greatest exponent. That’s right; the bum crowd who sold us the Iraq war would be dead against any total war strategy. That crowd has been quick to urge caution against “mighty, ancient…. (Add in any manly or fear-inspiring word here)” Iran. This last case is quite a whopper. The women can be excused. Who blames them for evading reality? But the war-intellectual has turned literature out of savagery, and art out of butchery. To dismiss all of their high-minded plans, and pseudo-Lockian notions would be for them to abrogate their reason for living. Therefore they can never take such a reasonable step as to endorse total warfare. Instead we must “win hearts and minds”; lest the Weekly Standard writers lose any sleep. The truth is, war is killing. It is won by killing the most the fastest, and coming home alive. Anything else is secondary. Politicians, pundits, and dolts alike; remember those words and learn.

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

The Irony- A short journey into the Liberal Mind

Liberals, in their modern form, favor; quotas, hate crimes laws and affirmative action. Quotas are not law, unlike the other two institutionalized forms of racism against whites, but many lawyers have imposed them. They are defending civil rights, you see. Hate crimes laws follow a simple principle; equality. Let's all be equal .
Why not?
That sounds great. Wait, why such "Hate Crimes" laws. You see, you lowly intellectually stumped conservative, some are more equal than others in our Litigation State.
But liberals are not racist people.
Liberals, in their modern summoning, are simply communists. They demand more health care, entitlements, welfare and therefore more power. But Communism was tried and failed. Let this not stop the determined Professor, ah you see, those other peoples could never succeed. They were not rich enough, and the totalitarian impulse of communism came from the local tradition, not communism. I'm sure your political science professor will tell you that, or maybe we cannot ever call another society anything, because that could be biased. And bias hurts people, except in the media complex, in that case it is okay(if it exists, remember that Fox is right wing but all other outlets are totally fair and objective). Those other people who tried Communism: Slavs, Bulgars, Germans, Czechs, Romanians, Cambodians, Indians, Angolans, Kazahks, Azerbaijianis, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Georgians, Hungarians, Afghanis, Nicaraguans; to mention the revolutions which failed: Greeks, Turks, Indonesians, Philippinos, Japanese, South Koreans all rejected this ideology. All these people were just in the wrong place, they are sure. We need to try it here.
Remember, it is the Conservatives and individualists who are racist.
The modern Socialist Democrap Party, the son of the solid south; the Confederate, Segregationalist, racist bloc, it is the party of minorities. Any minority is who votes for Republicans is hurting himself. The DemonicRats have a GREAT HISTORY of fighting the KKK, or was it fighting in it?
Moving on.
The liberals love the "Palestinians". Let us examine this amorus passion. Lets pretend, shall we.
Lets pretend that the current Arab population in the area of Israel was always called "Palestinian". Lets pretend that they have always seen themselves as a minority, lets pretend that in the Seven Pillars of Wisdom by Lawrence of Arabia, that they were not called Judean, Syrian, or Jerusalem Arabs. Now that you are pretending, the way is set for you to understand the plight of those christened Palestinian since the 1967 War.. correction, those immortally sacred Palestinians who have inhabited their land since before the Hittite Empire. We have to listen to these liberals, for they simply wish to return all land to the uprooted people except of course, the fascist Israelis. This is the exception. They will probably have to come before the International Criminal Tribunal, with Moses and Joshua tried in effigy, for the War Crimes against the Canaanites. Maybe the European Union, with Germany at the fore, can sue them for the expenses incurred during the Final Solution. This would be the way of the Socialist.
First, lets look at American History. We were evil you see, we Americans with our push westward. While moral judgments against abortion and other perversions are not to be made, any war must be deemed wrong. We committed "genocide" against the Indians...err, I mean "Native Americans". They were native and still are , in the liberal mind, despite being nothing more than nomads from Siberia.
They are still native. Native is the magic word. Once uttered, any objection can then b plastered with, “bigot”, “white-supremacist,” or any other word which has a negative connotation. The liberal surely does not understand either. But it seems to sound good.
In the immigration debacle, the left has this to offer: "Most migrants have native blood". Do you see? It is right that they flood the country. Such notions as nationhood, borders, and culture; they can only apply to others. These notions are outmoded for Western Nations, only built upon oppression. The Migrations is simply giving the country back to the descendants of those peace loving tribes of civilization such as the Comanches, Apaches and Aztecs. In fact, all land occupied by "invaders" must be given up.
Lets begin, let us write the UN Decree, yet to be sent down, to commence the Liberation Act.
First, those of Hispanic descent, having committed the crime of being related to natives who intermarried with the Spanish, will have to slice themselves in half and send part of themselves to Spain and Portugal, leaving half of themselves in their current country. By Decree the process continues, moving across the ocean. Perhaps Africa will be next, with all whites forced to leave. Exempted from this new International Law will be the Middle East. Why the oppressed Moslems cannot be asked to go from whence they came. In fact, give them Sicily. They once ruled there. The oppressing Christians cannot be allowed to drive them out. France will have to cease to be, as the population will be forced to move East, to the Frankish homelands in Germany. The English will have to follow, with many returning to Saxony. Some Scotts will be ordered dismembered in the Liberation Act; their parts sent to Scandinavia, Ireland, Normandy (only to follow to Scandinavia). While dealing with the Scandinavians, all Danes must return north. While purging the ancestors of the Vikings, all Russians with blonde hair will go.
Remember; all land must return to the native peoples.
South Europe will come next. Italians will suffer the Scottish fate; the task of self-dismemberment with their parts sent all across Europe. Yugoslavia will simply be sent east. Romania, as the province of Roma and a center of former Byzantine power, will have to go to Anatolia. Turks, due to their pro-Western attitudes and imperial past, will stand alone among Islamic nations; it will be sent East, to central Asia, to Turkmenistan. But as their ancestral lands in East Turkestan(Xianjiang Province) are inhabited by the utopian socialist Peoples Republic of China, they cannot go there. Hungary, as a nation thrice invaded by nomadic horsemen, will be sent packing the same way.
Why don't we continue?
Poles will suffer division in two. Part of them will go east and part west. The Ukraine will have to be resettled. This will test the liberation act to its utmost. All the halves and fulls in Spain will have to come here. Some Pole halves will settle the Crimea. The Spaniard will, of course, as Christians, not be allowed the fertile land here. They will be sent, as descendants of the Visigoths, back to where they came from: Gotland. Ukraine will go to the long defeated Dacians. This will be hard, as their race has long intermixed with so many. Genetic testing will have to be carried out, and even the smallest amount of blood will due. Perhaps a finger here, a toe there, an arm, a head, until they can get a body and more bodies; thus they can rebuild the long defeated Dacians, who fell to those corrupt Romans so long ago.
Austria, relatives of the Ostrogoths, will settle the North Coast of the black sea.
Moving to Asia they see many nations descended from the Mongols: Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Krygz. They will all go back to Mongolia. As socialist paradises of egalitarian equality, North Korea and China can remain. In fact, China has shown its great care for the world by donating much money to the American Democrat Party.
Its all about giving land back to the natives.
What of the Juden...I mean Jews?
They are invaders, says the liberal mind.
As "creative" people , these liberals, they take a naturally creative view of history.
Thus, the Palestinians are the Canaanites (remember, they will get their reperations after they try Joshua in effigy), the original inhabitants of the Levant. You have to be creative in this; free your mind from such notions as "facts", "opinions", "lies", these are far too constricting. Why not listen to the liberal icons, and light up a joint; they say this works best at curing conservatism. With this creativity you will see that the poor child-killing Palestinians are not descendants of the Arab invaders and the forcibly converted, not the lineage of Arab Islam which since the 7th Century has tried to wipe out Israel. Not the descendants of Arabs moved there during Ottoman rule. Instead, these people are the only pure-blooded people on Earth. Instead they are the only race of people unmoved and unchanged since 1200 B.C.
No peoples shall be allowed to invade land belonging to adherents to the religion of peace and love known as Islam. Palestine is sacred land toiled over by the dispossessed grandfathers of todays generation. These grandfathers, in turn, are descendants of the principled throat cutters who invaded and put to the sword the Christian East, sending Orthodox priests flooding west and leaving the conqueror to build his mosques upon the holiest sites of Judaism and Christianity.
Remember, if you OWN and BELIEVE in the all-peaceful Koran, you are a victim. So let us dispense with the above paragraph. Dear reader, you must wipe its memory from your mind.
With this Creative History, soon to be instituted in our schools, we can see things more clearly. We can scan to the history books. With the Iranian CEO of Houghton-Miffllin, we can see the source of such thing as "the Crusades were Christian aggression" and "Corruption caused the fall of Rome".
Ah, simplicity.
I guess they told me it was so; so it must be so, Rome must have fallen from all those orgies and not from over taxation, immigration and depopulation. The Iranian approved textbook can tell us about this. Since we have outsourced so many jobs, we should continue the trend. In fact, I'm sure China could produce far better objective histories than we.
Now that we have dispensed with all conservative notions, “truth”, “lies”, and the like- let us add one more, “logic”- we can proceed further. It turns out the only source to ever be trusted is at the least a pinko-leftist. A Communist is by far more priestly. But a pinko will do for getting view of things.
Ask a the pinko: What organization has had a positive impact upon liberty?
Their answer: the ACLU.
What a proud group of the most vaunted of professions: LAWYERS. They have such a proud history: mandating that evolution be taught in schools, fighting for civil rights, giving us privacy rights- defending Nazis, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, winning a decision that defendants cannot be brought into courts in handcuffs(which recently bore fruit during Brian Nichols killing spree), defending the rights of gays to join the Boy Scouts and working to litigate that evil group to death and defending flag burning as free speech. The defenders of liberty did not stop there. They recently filed a Freedom of Information request to the Pentagon, thereby encouraging weak generals to prosecute our soldiers- I mean torturers and war criminals. Naturally, in the tradition of liberty, God has been knocked down one lawsuit at a time. A higher power is the worst infringer of privacy rights, so we can't have that. What! You say God knows all! That must mean he knows what goes on “in my bedroom”. This is the most sacred and holy right of the leftist! This cannot be infringed upon. The Holy Communist Temple of the bedroom shall not be defiled by the Holy One! In the interest of liberty, every defense paper and report will be released, declassified. China hasn't stolen enough secrets, they need more. They haven't gotten enough from our declassified material.
Just ask the ACLU, the government has no right to keep secrets from the communists.
Speaking of governance, know this maxim: as a liberal, only the public sector matters. When tax cuts come up: complain of foreign debt, military spending and declare economic collapse. Above all, resist all attempts at fixing.........oops again, destroying entitlements. Speak only of the social security trust fund. In the same vein, when someone points out they like your red shirt, insist that it is blue.
Ask a Democrat, they'll promise that if we just had not taken the war to our enemies' heartland in Iraq, we would be able to pay easily for the program. While they are at it they will tell you that it is not normal for nations involved in global wars to get into debt. These Democrats really know their stuff. In this frame of mind, you will see that the government debt is all that matters. Why all that money surely goes back to us in services. By the solemn oath of politicians, far more valuable I am sure, than even swearing upon "that book" which the left will soon bar us from owning, the money will come back to us. That 3% of your money which is "used for your own good" goes into the sacred trust fund. Depend upon it! Bill Clinton told us it was good. And what an honest man, practically a Confucian ideal of a leader! Isn't the money again taxed when you collect it? Why yes, but, ask any bum; the current 53% net collectors on the government dole are not enough. And the bum, as we know, is equal to the millionaire. In fact he is better.
Ask the liberal about education. You see, one of the things your children will hear is that "there are no terrorists, only freedom fighters". Ah, as John Doe contractor in Iraq is having a scimitar shoved into his throat and his head sawed off while he screams for life, he must remember that he died for freedom. How loving and compassionate! The liberal way it the true way to compassion, don’t you see. I'm sure he/she liberal can tell us that we spend more on defense than education. Aren’t we glad that facts were done away with?
We must to turn to liberals for the next question.
Why fix Medicare and Medicaid?
Just off the old and weak. Why not call it the Schiavo Act. Then demand more health care for the fat and worthless union worker, so they can take three months off. Then hit the business with more taxes and get the mafia-union, union-mafia to demand higher pay. Then you can complain about outsourcing. Yes, this, my friends, is the Red lined Way, the Red Truth, and the Red Life.
The academician liberals’ solution to lobbyists shall be: hand over all power to the left-wing judicial oligarchy. After all, judges cannot be bought. In fact, unique among humans, they alone are inflatable, perhaps half-man, half-god.
With the liberal solutions in mind, shall I continue with this logic, should I burn my books now? Right now, I should go forth and purge my shelf of all illiberal texts. I should take them outside and burn them to avoid censure by the fifth column. I will have to throw my military books in their pyre first; there is nothing more threatening to the liberal order than tales of the glory of battle and grit of war; the need to kill for one's country and defend what one has. Instead, the youth must be fed government heroine and likewise kept ion the dole. Stay home, play games, get fat; have sex with your animals, sister, brother, or same sex friend. But whatever you do, do not become a baby-killer! Why I'm sure all those tens of thousands of Sunnis who died in Iraq were all innocent, and none of them had anything to do with the Baa th Party, genocide, the invasion of Kuwait, or anything else negative. The Illiad must surely go next. While a symbol of literature which is most important to liberals, it must be purged of its most violent elements. It celebrates such life threatening values as "heroism", "self-defense", "service"; all very threatening to the new socialist world order. Sci-Fi will be next; as no one shall dream of the stars, "we have problems here", and any space program might endanger that couch blob on welfare. My Modern American Usage will be tossed into the flames. Its not progressive enough. I swear upon the grave of Karl Marx that is even contains sexist language. If it is not pop-culture rap-crap masqueraded as the new cousin of Shakespeare, it will not be allowed. English is the imperial language, to be rightfully replaced by Spanish. My Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man book, will be incinerated. The Great Prophet must not be insulted. Its just too risky to own such material nowadays. Speaking of Moore, his new movies "How to Insult Capitalism While Gaining Girth From its Fruits" and "Why I Never Complain About Fatness in America:Socialism at a Thousand Pounds" will be out soon. Worst of all in my books, the apostasy of Michael Savage. Last and absolute worst; my pre-1975 history textbook, one untarnished by the new censors. Or I could keep it, as long as the Iranian CEO was at hand to make sure it was good-to-go.

More on Haditha

I am hearing more sickening garbage about the so called "Haidtha Massacre".

Apparently military lawyers threatened the Marines with the death penalty if they did not sign a confession. The Marines are now in chains. They will actually be subject to the death penalty. And the command is not stopping this. This is Lt. Pantano again, but far worse. The men did what needed to be done. They killed the enemy. We invited- that is the U.S. government put in power by the people- to join the military and kill the enemy. But when they do we throw them in jail? What insanity is this? What kind of worthless generals are in power?

This whole experiment of America has been nice; but its over and done for.

How much more waking up does this country need? How many thousands have to die if three thousand burned on our own soil plus all who died in battle are not enough to teach the unwashed and sadly uninformed masses?

Somebody give me an answer.

Where is our Joshua to smite these child-sacrificing Caananites?

The Spirit of Protest in China


Posted on 06/20/2006 4:18:54 AM PDT by Dr. Marten
BEIJING (AFP) - Thousands of students at a central China university have continued to stare down police as they maintained a boycott of classes over their treatment by school management.
Students have been on strike since between 5,000 and 10,000 of them began ransacking the campus on Thursday night, with several hundred police brought in to quell the unrest, according to witnesses and participants.

This is good news. The China Threat is real. I will begin to touch on this subject soon. It is reappearing in the news with the North Korean missile test. Make no mistake, China is an issue to worry over. China rising as a regional power will shake east asia. Provided the Chinese people rise up and throw out the madarin dictators, there will be very little possibility for china and the U.S. to go to war. Provided they stay, and our so-called "China Policy" continues to appease and feed this totalitarian beast, war is unavoidable.

Monday, June 19, 2006

Terror Attack

I am currently listening to Boortz. He is a libertarian talk-show ost on in Atlanta. Check him out if you havent.

He is talking about the failed gas attack. This is disturbing. First the details of the plot are as follows:

-A Saudi Arabian had plans for a working device the distribute cyanide gas.
-The plan was called off by the second in command Ayman al-Zawahiri

What this means is Al-Qadea is recovering. If the top leaders are able to communicate over such a diostance, from Saudi Arabia to presumably Pakistan, they are not crippled. They are capable of a chemical attack. Chemical attacks are the moist difficult, but this revelation proves that Al-Qadea is capable of pulling it off. This means that the possibility of a mass-casualty attack goes up, as chemicals are very easy to come by in an industrial scoiety such as ours.

Why would Al-Qaeda stop an attack on the U.S.?

Because such an attack will wake us up. They are preparing something much worse than 9-11. All A.Q. has to do is wait a few months and the American people will put in a worse set of cowards than those who are currently populating and polluting our halls of power. Our enemies are much smarter and far more determined than anyone in Washington.

Its sad but true.

Saturday, June 17, 2006

More on Iraq

For all polls and foolish minds who would inquire to ask: I disapprove of the conduct of the Iraq war, not the war itself. Now, here is an article in the Intellectual Conservative which follows much of my thought.

There are many people to blame. War is an action of the state and States have many actors within them. Generals have become press-men and soft nannies. The one Marine General, who admitted that he loved to kill the enemy, was forced into silence. This man, whose name I forget, should have been made Bush's right hand man. Patton also relished in slaying Germans. But back then it was accepted. Now it is something to be suppressed.

Just this week I found that a Marine was being courtmartialed for writing a song which lampooned the enemy.

Iraq is a police action. But now it looks like we are concerned more with policing our own rather than Iraq.

Wesley Clark, the slayer of the Serbian people, is a good example of the new Generals. His type is responsible for this mess.

"Stay the course", the Republican phrase devoid of meaning, is not an option. Running away is not either. Hence both parties are wrong on the "iraq war" which should be termed, in light of most facts, the Iraq campaign. But then again negotiation is now the "solution" to the Iranian nuke crisis.

To my knowledge their is no major politician who has called for the eradication of the enemy.

Usually in a dispute between two people there is usually a third option which is the right path. Where is this third option? Our politics is so irrational that we are given two false alternatives and expected to swallow one batch of bile rather than a pile of garbarge.

The Islamic Conquest of Somalia

"Two Somali warlords defeated in recent fighting in the capital, Mogadishu, are reported to have fled the country.
Bashir Raghe and Muse Sudi Yalahow, both part of a coalition formed to fight an Islamist militia, were said to have left Mogadishu by boat.
The Union of Islamic Courts gained control of the capital two weeks ago after months of fierce fighting.
The lawless city had been controlled by a group of secular warlords since the government fell in 1991."

Courtesy of JihadWatch.

Islam wins another victory today. This would not be worth mentioning if it was not bigger than Somalia. Why is it bigger than Somalia?

Somalia is nested along the Eastern African coast. To its West is the nation of Ethiopia. Ethiopia, for those who are unaware, is one of the oldest Christian Nations. Readers of the Bible will remember the "Queen of Sheeba" who is thought to hail from Abyssinia. This land, know known as "Ethiopia" once encompassed Somalia, parts of the Sudan,and bits of Southern Arabia. It has lost this position over the centuries. It resisted Islam. It is among the few proud nations, such as France, India, Greece and Israel who have thrown out their Jihadists. Ethiopia has resisted the Islamic horde since it began to raid and push into its territory.

Ethiopia is being enveloped. With the Southern Sudanese being pushed further south and crushed, and with dawa in horrible swing, with Somalia about to go Taliban, Ethiopia is threatened. But this is not just about Ethiopia. It is about Africa. For good or ill, the Pope has delcared Africa the new home of Christianity. On the other side of the continent is the Nigerian mess, with a near-civil war pervading. This is a new Jihadist front. South Africa is also under a dawa campaign. East Africa is already largely Muslim thanks to centuries of contact with Maylan merchants hailing from Malacha and the Mughal Empire. Liberia, similar to Somalia, is full of Islamic gangs. Recently, and very quietly, the Mauratanian government was overthrown. This nation has declared itself "an Arab nation", and is introducing the Arabic script. Chad is being destabilized by Sudanese funded and trained militas. Of course the Algerian horror continues unabated. Egypt is a pot ready to boil over. Al-Qaeda even has ties to the conflict in the Congo.

If the Pope wants Africa he might need to call a new Crusade. The Muhammadans already have.

Islam is conquering Africa, and indeed the entire world.

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Political Correctness at its Most Vehement

Malkin has a blurb up about the Haditha investigation of our good Marines.

It turns out Lt. Pantano was not the last. The pencil pushers and political backstabbers are striking again at the bravest of the brave.

You'd guess that the Pentagon would know the seriousness of the conflict, having been struck by the enemy. But I guess its too much to ask from the vaunted and great generals who inhabit that building.

I wonder if Patton would have been charged in a like manner for pursuing and killing some of Pancho Villa's men in 1916?

Tuesday, June 13, 2006


Zarqawi is dead.

This is a late post for the matter, but that purposeful. Every single blog had the story up, so why post about it on the day it happened. One must not be swept along in the moment, because the structures of history and politics stem from a deeper ground which is not so easily blown to and fro. In other words, when anaylizing politics, you have to un-learn everything American culture has yet taught you.

Here is practical benefit of Zaraqwis death:
1)He once threatened to attack America. Now he cannot do that. Temporarily his comrades will be confused. Their network is stretched thin.
2)Iraq will recieve a repreive- for a time.

Here are some other facts to consider:
-Iran still holds all the cards in Iraq- we are negotiating with the good government of Iran. With us or against us.....
-Al Qaida will be looking alot better in the Arab world. Zarqawi was bad press. Now a reapproachment between Sunni and Shia against the infidel(the worst of filth according to both) will be much more possible.
-Al Qaida and others will continue to wage Jihad. Islam will continue to conquer the Sudan, encircle Ethiopia, decimate Israel, batter down the Balkans, attacking all nations with wantonly suicidal rage; wage dawa and demographic war against Europe, Russia, India, America and portions of Central America; launch sweeping persecutions of non-Muslim minorities, and seek to over turn all non-puritancial governments in thier dark corner of the earth. Until Islam itself is challenged, none of this will change.
-Al-Qaida or like minded people still have a great chance of getting WMDs in the next few years.
-Our border is still open to infiltration. Our immigration system is still wide open to Muslims.
-Someone will no doubt arise to replace Zarqawi...

So, in the larger strategic scheme of things, what good was the death of this one man?

Saturday, June 10, 2006

Civil Rights in the Middle East

The recent events of the turbulent Middle East have focused world media attention on this region. This would not be the first time such attention has come. But one thing is different. The current events in the Middle East have a direct bearing upon the civilized nations of east and west. What goes on, in say Uzbekistan, affects all. With the advent of the Al-Qaeda movement, Americans are now totally committed to a long term military and political investment. The current question being asked is: Should America bring democracy to the Middle East? I believe this is the wrong question. America should support the people who battle for their civil rights simply because the victory in such a battle would immediately be a plus for all nations currently threatened by the tactics of terrorists. But this civil rights battle will be most crucial to those people who are not of the majority Islamic religion or sect. America must support these battles.
The question of "rights" in the area is a lurid tale. Going back to antiquity the region had diverse influencers; Byzantine, Persian, Egyptian and Semitic. But today one religion and one nationality will be conjured up when one speaks of the Middle East: Islam and Arabs. The advent of Islam in the sweeping sands of the Hejaz would utterly shake the known world. The two reigning empires; Persia and Byzantium, would be hard pressed and eventually overturned by the followers of Muhammad, their former lands becoming he core of Dar Al-Islam. Encouraged by the words of Muhammad: "Fight against them until strife be at and end, and the religion be all of it God's." Opposing belief systems, polities and creeds were crushed under. The jizya, a tax upon non-Muslims was instituted. Christianity and Zoroastrianism were blotted out year-by-year. The non-Arabs were also persecuted during this period of the Caliphate; the Kurds chief among those. Later, once the Arab led Caliphate was made into dust; the Assyrians would join the persecuted on the edge of oblivion. The jizya was collected with much abuse. The "protected" minority under this tax, known as the "dhimmi" would know full well his inferiority. Sometime in the middle ages Christianity slipped into minority status, with its adherents forced onto the edges of society. The caliph fell, and modernity came. Britain and France, keen to set up puppet regimes in Syria and Iraq played upon Arab nationalism. Nothing at all changed for the minorities there. In Persia the Baluchis and Khuezistanis could be added to the list of suppressed peoples. In Egypt the age old religion of the Copts has all but vanished. The prejudices and inherent racism of the governing systems of the region did not change and continue to this day.
But this does not have to stand. Now these oppressed peoples may have their chance at real rights; if the world heeds their cries and works to finally free them from base treatment. America must call upon the nations of the middle east; large and small, to uphold the rights of every citizen equally under the law. In some nations the concept of law may be new. For those under the absolutist monarchies the will of the ruler defines all and law has no meaning. Obviously a corpus of civil law must be formed. This is anathema to mainstream and so-called "extreme" Islamic thought. But the nature of things, reeking of injustice, demands such a course. Members of the Umma and unbeliever must be held as equal under the law. Equality under the nation-state will have to become the norm; not will of the ruler or the enforcement of de fact if not actual Arab Muslim supremacy. This strategy holds great benefits for unlike the strategy of democratization, it cannot be used by the Islamists to gain power and overturn the enterprise. Asserting the civil rights of religious and racial minorities will put to death the hopes of the resurrection of an expansionist caliphate.
The argument against such a shift in our policy would be something like this: People in the Middle East are bloodthirsty. It would continue, there has been much fanaticism and war and this violent tendency lends the region to dictatorship. This is a sound argument in many respects. But which one of these would not apply to Europe?
Another, while not uttered, would go something like this: this will create instability and disrupt oil. I refute this thus; Stability in the Middle East has never been good for the world. The Caliphate was certainly stable. Once it had this stability it marched into Spain at the Jib-al-Tariq; into India beginning in the Sindh(712), into the Eastern Roman Empire and a siege of Byzantium(717), and into China in a decisive battle at Talas(751). Oil cannot dictate our survival. Our survival depends not on some half-baked notion of popular democracy, a folly anywhere and certainly a folly in the intellectual desert of the Middle East, but in liberating the non-Arab and most importantly non-Muslim peoples of this region. That is, to liberate the Kurds, who fell by the sword of the Arabs. To liberate the Assyrians, the only people on this earth who still speak Aramaic, the language which Yeshua delivered his message of salvation. Christians, Atheists and even Ahmadis and Sufis, must be given equal rights. This cannot be unilaterally imposed. A philosophical movement within the Islamic countries must arise. This policy is fraught with problems, but it is a surer bet towards peace than the current foolish game which we re playing. The policy is failing. It is only national honor which holds us in Iraq. It is only the desire to make the sacrifices of the troops there worthwhile that salvages any popular support for the war. Even the wider “war on terror”(really the war of Islam against the west) is compromised by a lack of will. No terrorist group on earth truly fears retaliation. Their leaders can be killed or their fighters slain, but recruitment picks up all the losses. Locked in a civilizational war which it refuses to acknowledge, the United States continues to try to beat the insurgency in Iraq and stop the Taliban from returning in full. Rightfully seen as weak for this failing, the United States is losing support from Reformers in the Middle East and other nations. But it can be argued America will get no help no matter what it does. But with an aggressive attack into the midst of the enemy one can at least be assured of a victory, “international community” be damned. But our current strategy assures neither support nor victory. It just stagnates. It can be summed up as “sit and get shot at”. America postures about Iran and Syria, and passes weak resolutions to and fro, but nothing is done. Iran builds nukes. Syria stockpiles WMD and both fund terrorism. “With us or against us” I suppose. Meanwhile the American taxpayer is daily raped by the federal mandarins and pork-spending tied into military supplementals so that we can “fight terror”. Even the military technology is of negligible value, since it only makes up for a lack of will.
In Conclusion: In order to prevent further attacks the United States must press with all available means for religious and racial equality; first upon the Middle East and then its surrounding areas. The borders of the existing states are false. Iran is still a Persian imperialist state, Iraq was of course arbitrarily drawn up by the British, along with Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Sudan. Syria is a false nation. All of these states must be allowed to disintegrate so that the oppressed minorities can form their won states and assert their own rights by force of arms. This is much more moral and much less dangerous than supporting the façade of an Islamic Democracy, which is an oxymoron. This struggle will be long. But the only alternatives are: retreat, Total War, and the current weak-handed strategy. If we are going to fight an unconventional enemy we must think outside of the box.

Friday, June 09, 2006

Notes on the Mongol Conqests

The following are notes which I have gathered over the months during a study in the military campaigns of the Mongols for a possible dramatic or historical project. These campaigns are important to study, especially for the United States. The Mongols, always numerically inferior, defeated Islam and China in the same century. As such they must be seen as examples as how to fight these enemies. No modern army, especially western, is capable of the precise cruelty described in these accounts of his campaign against the Kwarazmian-Shah, a ruler of what could be termed Central Asia and Persia. In other words Iran. These campaigns prove that strategy trumps numbers, a truth lost on our politicians and foolish media pundits.

All quotes from a strange but detailed site

in sharp contrast to other steppe conquerors, was not primarily guided by greed for material riches or other allurements of this world. His was a soaring political ambition, an almost supernatural ability to plan ahead and to let all his moves be directed at political aims that represented the formation of a political structure that was capable of being extended in time and space. People who betray others merit the harshest punishment according to Temuchin, who could not trust unprincipled people who betrayed their master.His personal qualities, notably his intelligence and pulsating intuition, his fresh and invigorating life-force, his intensely ambitious yet selfless nature, his endless capacity for devotion, secured his ascendancy

The Khan united his people in other word. Soon, after his first lightning campaign against Northern China, he sent an embassy bearing trade wears to the Shah.

Shah Mohammed of Khwarezm, which was an empire encompassing Afghanistan, present-day Persia, and Turkestan, that is the area between the Aral Sea and the Caspian, secretly ordered the murder of a caravan of Mongol merchants sent by Chingis Khan to the city of Otrar. Chingis Khan responded by sending an envoy, giving Mohammed the choice between handing Otrar's governor Inalchuq over to the Mongols, or accepting war. This envoy was put to death, and war was declared.

1219: Shah Mohammed collected about 400,000 men to oppose Chingis Khan. Chingis with Subedei as his chief of staff entered the Shah's domain with 90 000 men in from the north and sent Chepe, another of his great generals, with 30 000 over one of the world's highest mountain ranges in from the east. 180,000 were killed in the main battle, but the Shah escaped. After a series of fierce battles during which the Shah only narrowly escaped, the Mongols left during the dark night to join Chingis 1200 miles away, receiving replacements. Chingis, mindful of the need to kill and eliminate the leader to accomplish victory, sent Subedei and Chepe with 2 tuman (20 000 men) to hunt down the Shah. During this hunt, the two Mongol generals with their riders travelled across the whole of Persia, wiping out the population in large areas.

1220: Bukhara and Samarkand are taken, and this was the decisive blow against the Khwarezmians. Mohammad had harbored high military ambitions, and even hoped to be able to conquer China, but when Chingis Khan took Peking in 1215 his hope was finally crushed. Even if the highest estimates of his army reckoned that he had 400 000 men under his command, his army was heterogeneous and of low morality. These men were mainly mercenaries of Turkish origin whose loyalty toward the Khwarezmian Empire and its ruler was very fragile. In addition to that, the army was hated by the population, because its members, foreign to Mohammad's people in every respect, habitually plundered and terrorized them savagely.

However, Mohammad had to rely upon this army for the maintenance of his power. That means, he alienated himself from his own people. Even worse, the loyalty of his army was further weakened by the emergence of a military aristocracy which mainly served its own interests. Worst of all, his own mother Terken Khatun belonged to one of these aristocratic clans. Terken Khatun proved a fateful influence. Among other things, she demanded that the one of Mohammad's sons who were closest related to her be made the crown prince. Mohammad's eldest son, Jalal al-Din, was also the most gifted of his sons, but due to the pernicious influence of Terken Khatun he could not make him his heir. Naturally, this created a serious split between father and Jalal al-Din, who saw that the way the empire was ruled spelled disaster. Jalal al-Din was governor of Afghanistan, whereas the favorite of Terken Khatun was not only made heir to the throne, but was given the main part of the empire. Further; Mohammad's wicked mother established her own court, and that undermined the authority of Mohammad seriously.

Because of all this, Mohammad must resort to violence and killing in order to impose what little authority he could wield over his people. It was typical of his way of governing that he regularly killed the governors of the various regions. In addition to this, his army of disloyal mercenaries needed wages, which had to be covered by appallingly high taxes, which together with the irregular but frequent plundering regularly led to rebellions all over the area under his incompetent and disorganized rule.

Thus, Shah Mohammad had no support in his people, and the loyalty of his army was shaky, to say the least. The combination of the disorganizing influence of his mother and his own incapability to win the support of his population effectively prevented him from any proper defence of his empire when disaster came. When the Mongols attacked, he could not do the obvious militarily correct thing; to meet the Mongols before they entered his area. Instead he chose to defend the biggest garrisons like Otrar, Bukhara and the capital Samarkand. The morale of his army was easily too low to mobilize any high-quality defence.

1221: After less than half a year of flight across the Persian land the Shah died from pleurisy, poor, exhausted and in rags. Now the Khwaresmian Empire had ceased to exist. Chepe and Subedei then made a famous raid around the Caspian Sea and into Russia before returning to Chingis' main army. It is this raid that prompted Edward Gibbon to admiringly state that "Such a ride has never before been attempted, and has never since been repeated."

“Often in this deceptive retreat they would extend their line until the enemy was surrounded without realizing it. If the hostile troops massed together and fought bravely, the Mongol enveloping line would open, allowing them to retreat. they would then be attacked on the march. This was the fate of the Boharan (Bokharan) army (of Mamluks, 30,000 retreating cavalry warriors; overwhelmed and out flanked, perished in a day, under Genghis and Chepe noyon, after the defeated army of Mamluk slave soldiers fled Bokhara, in abandonment of Shah Muhammad II’s army. The great Persian city of Samarkand, and then the Persian capital of Baghdad, fell thereafter, to Genghis Khan’s sons, as described above)."

“... at Bukhara, 30,000 garrison troops (mercenary Mamluk cavalry) tried to escape the Mongols but were cut off and slaughtered. Genghis himself rode his horse into (the most hallowed) Friday Mosque and had (library) cases emptied of copies of the Koran (Q’uran), the holiest Muslim text. They were then filled with grain (looted from Bukhara’s storages), for Mongol horses to forage from.”

Note: No trials for those who desecrate the "holy Koran" and no sanctuary for enterprising Muslims in their mosques.

...resulting in Muhammad Shah's envelopment between the Mongol general, Chepe Noyon, from the east, and Genghis Khan from the unanticipated <'impossible'> west. By which the Shah - formerly called 'another Alexander' - was required to divide his vast, but out-generaled armies: one of which was nearly devastated in the field by three tumen's <30,000> of Orluk Juchi’s 'Mangudei<'God-belonging'> heavy-cavalry suicide-troops; who, combined with flanking tumens showering the Mangudei-targeted-enemy with arrows, left 160,000 Persians slain in one day; with minimal Mongol casualties. One Persian official (Vizier) in particular, who had firstly agreed to peace with Genghis and then executed several envoys and confiscated by force what had been a camel train of lavish gifts for him, was captured and put to death by the pouring of molten silver into his ears and eyes.

Muhammad Shah had seriously underestimated Genghis Khan's Horde after he learned that they and their ponies were mostly of small physical stature and were equipped with sparse chain-mail armor; and, that few of the Mongol horsemen carried large shields; relying on light shields, body armor and super-swift, masterful war tactics. Russian, Polish and Hungarian armies would later make the same mistake of underestimating the formidability of Genghis Khan’s second and third generation Mongol armies at their Eastern European gates.

The Mongols were also terrifing in presence, moving silently. They were often laughed at for their small size and small mounts.

“The striking force of the Mongol army was all cavalry and for both heavy and light cavalry the basic uniform was the same, consisting of blue or brown tunics called ‘kalats’. Round all the borders, collars and cuffs the blue kalats were faced in red and the brown ones in light blue, while for officers the facings were decorated with gold and silver thread. In winter the kalats were lined with fur and the fur replaced the facing. Their trousers were either blue or gray, again lined with fur in winter, and they all wore thick, laced up leather boots with no heels.

"The heavy cavalry wore a coat of mail with a cuirass (torso covering armor) made of (hardened) oxhide or iron scales covered in leather, and the light cavalry wore either a cuirass of lacquered leather strips or else a quilted kalat and no armour at all.

"From the crowns of all the caps and helmets hung two ribbons and the fur trimmings varied according to rank. For officers, in ascending order, they were made from wolf, fox, badger and monkey skins, and for the men, from dog and goat. Beneath the caps and helmets the weather beaten faces of the experienced soldiers were made more terrifying by the thick scars that they had *slashed in their cheeks to stop their beards from growing (*the record speculates: to eliminate icing conditions on their beards in winter - the 4th century AD Huns practiced the same scarring technique; apparently for the same pragmatic as well as fiercely intimidating reasons).

"Every man carried a (small ) wicker shield covered in thick leather while on his left side hung two bows, one for long range and one for shorter range, and on his right side at least two quivers containing a minimum of sixty arrows (cartons of arrows were available in reserve; kept and distributed by in-ranks armorers assigned to that task). A lasso hung from his saddle and a dagger (‘kris' ) was strapped to the inside of his forearm. Apart from these, the light cavalrymen carried a short sword and two or three javelins, and the heavy cavalryman carried a (single edged, slightly curved) scimitar, a battle ax or mace, and a twelve foot lance with a horse-hair pennant and hook below the blade.

'In their saddlebags they carried a change of clothing, a cooking pot, field rations, which were usually yoghurt, millet, dried meat and 'kumiz' (fermented mare's milk), a leather water bottle, a fishing line, files for sharpening arrows, a needle and thread and other tools for repairing equipment. Not only was the saddlebag waterproof, it could also be inflated to act as a crude life jacket for fording rivers.

The charge of the heavy cavalry was always the end of the Mongol battle plan. They advanced at the trot and in silence. Only at the last possible moment was the order to gallop sounded on the great naccara, a huge kettle drum carried by a camel, and by the time they had let out one hideous scream (‘kiai'). their lances were among the enemy.

A parting quote, certainly not from the Sermon on the Mount, but a mentality which crushed both Islamic Persia and the Abbasid Caliph:

After one of his generals asked him what what pleased him most, The general’s superior replied amiably:
“Comrade. The greatest pleasure Is to vanquish your ene-
mies and chase them before you. To rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your busom their wives and daughters.”
- +Genghis Kha Khan

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Notes on Canada

From canadian no dhimmitude

Nader Hashemi, a political scientist who teaches Middle Eastern studies at the University of Toronto, said the dominant strain of Islam in Canada is a harder-line version of the religion than most people realize.

"The imams who have been preaching in Canadian mosques have been imports, people not born and raised in Canada, and their training tends to be in the theological seminaries of the Muslim world," he said.

"When they come here, there is an intellectual chasm between the training they've received in the Muslim world and the reality of secular modernity here in Canada," Mr. Hashemi said. "It's not changing yet but it's going to have to change."

This has to be a sobering fact for the United States. If it ever comes to us sharing a border with an Islam-infested canada we will have to prepare for a Jihad on our own land. We already experienced a Jihad-strike on 9-11. But this bloodshed was a pitance when compared to the bloodshed suffered by the nations, such as the Southern Sudan, Ethiopia, Serbia, India, the Philipines, Russia- and every other nations which shares a border with Islam.

Book Excerpt

This is an excerpt from my unpublished novel, "No God But Allah", a biography of the life and times of Muhammad. Publishers prefer that you have your book read by many. So I post this scene to illicit comments from whomever may read it. Criticism is welcome.

Muhammad could now look upon his archenemy, which lay there prostrate, half-unconscious, and stuck in delirium. The shackles were tight, and the pain should have been enough to awaken him. But he was lost in his joyful delirium, and he seemed to smile through it all.

“Poor Sufyan,” he taunted in a mocking manner. “Is it not now time for you to admit that I am the Apostle of Allah?”

Sufyan looked up, and his eyes seemed to come to life a bit, as if something a bit dead in him had been ripped to the fore. “To this I still posses some doubt.”

Abbas, his captor, was thrown to rage. He seized him by the mat of hair upon his head, and jerked that head backward.

“Damn you, Submit and recite the testimony!” he pressed the blade in his hand into Sufyan’s neck. He could feel it cutting his neck as he pressed it there.

“Recite! Recite!”

“What shall I recite?”

“Recite the testimony!”

“Of what? There is nothing for me to read.”

Abbas gritted his teeth hard as his hands squeezed the nadle of the sword, shaking with a deep rage.

“Recite: there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Apostle! Testify before your head is sliced off!”

Muhammad spoke to Abbas.

“Do not be so gruff with him; for he has not yet seen the manifest signs of my Prophetic Office. Take him to the spur of the mountains round Mecca, so that the Companions may be seen.”


Abbas took the shackled Sufyan up the craggy cliffs. A jutting rock was this set of cliffs, shooting like a knife blade into the sky which was still blue and beautiful on that day. Like an affront to blue placidity and pure white clouds the dark rock rose.

Sufyan stared down at his feet, watching his step as he was lugged upward. The iron armor of his captor was unforgiving to his eyes; so he looked not at its cold demeanor.

“On more step, fool.” Abbas called.

Sufyan struggled with his captor’s last demand, his flesh screaming in pain, his flesh in protest. His minds itself was numb. Soon he fell to his knees. The rock cut the flesh on his legs; for the very act of kneeling was a pain.

“Up, for the apostle of Allah has ordered you to see the great company of the prophet; woe to you, for we are legion.”

Sufyan looked up with a blank face, and said nothing. The chains which held him rattled as Abbas jerked him forward.

Sufyan was forced to stand, and the wounds upon him bled. The air was dusty, as dust had risen from below and become a choking food which his lungs could not take in. His flesh stopped resisting and he now turned toward the blazing sun, and cast his eyes downward, to that sight which he was ordered to see.

A sight filled the valley the likes of which his eyes had never beheld. He could see a few tribal banner flaying in the wind. His mind cried foul as he realized that they were not few but many. Not many, but innumerous! They rampaged against the sky. He saw them, and a great terror took him. It was as if he had been struck with an arrow, something which took hold of him. He knew those tribes, and his mind could only guess at the numbers. His mind began to run a calculus, and he actually choked aloud.

“I see the fruits which he has borne,” Sufyan muttered.

“Woe to you!” said Abbas with a smile. “None can withstand him. It was all due to his prophetic office. There is no choice left but Submission or death!”

Sufyan stared out, and Abbas’ hand jerked him back and then forward, pushing him neared the edge of the cliff, and the thousand foot drop downwards. He stared at the open air, and it for a second looked a beautiful thing. But the cloud of dist raised by the great Mohammedan force rose and swallowed that sight.

He wiped his eyes. He looked off into the morning horizon, and looked down to the horde longingly. He had wished it to be gone when his eyes were cast down, but it was there, in its full horror. “Legion indeed. Was it the case that I had wielded a stronger axe and cut down your tree and all its fruits. Woe indeed, for now it is such that no fire that we could kindle, save maybe the light of the sun itself, would suffice to swallow the Obedient.”

Abbas laughed heartily. “No, by Allah, not any but the light of a thousand suns! Shall you give the testimony?”

Sufyan had not yet turned. He still stared out over the cliff. He moved closer, but then he stopped.

“I have seen what is over that edge, and verily it must be as you say. I shall walk down the edge with you as a brother.”

“Recite: There is no god but Allah..”

Monday, June 05, 2006

Notes upon Haditha

This is just distgusting.

Has anyone else notice the pack of wolves in the media setting upon the haditha incident?
Let us ask the question: is killing civilians unjustified in a situation where it is impossible to tell civilian and enemy apart? Ask the soldiers who have been in this type of war. They are far more qualified than I. There are many problems causing the "Haditha Syndrome", which is most virulent in the American press, but is also in the military. Did not Illario Pantano nearly stand trail for shooting a possible "insurgent"? Did the Abu Ghuraib soldiers not get a ten-year sentence for panties on the heads of the enemy? The military is betraying its own. If this investigation prodcues convictions, I am sorry to say, one must think very hard about whether or not to serve in a military where the enemy nation is of more value to the command structure than its own. Yes Iraq, as long as its lovely people continue to shoot, throw rocks at and taunt our wounded troops will be an enemy nation. This is the problem my friends- war can only be fought for a negative end. War is an act of destruction. War is waged in order to kill the enemy. Whether his nation becomes a democracy after that is just a fringe benefit.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

The Coming of the Second Civil War

Consequently of the prevailing and unshakable cowardice inherent in the effete feminized political class; and upon the dread heels of nearly two-decades of utter foolery and vain actions, the nation we know as the United States stands upon the deep edge. On the other edge of the abyss sits another nation, called the United States surely enough, but a simply more western outpost of Socialist Utopia World. Behind us, deep in that recess of time which is only a faint phantom to most is the mass-immigration which cast the Roman Empire into ruin. Shall we ignore yet another lesson? Or better yet shall the Senate? History has one purpose: To teach those who come after. Let us then learn.

Thousands upon thousands took to the streets during the immigration debate. This should have been a wake-up call. All previous illusions should have been swept away. Illusions like: “They just come here to work,”, “they are just like we are, because we are all immigrants”, “Mexicans are the victims of discrimination,” – and the list could go on and swallow the whole piece.

The issue is yet fading from the knat-like attention span of America and the media, but the movement to destroy America still goes strong. The pro-illegal marchers had good company. Many left-wing groups, such as ANSWER, marched side by side with Mexicans who were actively calling for the destruction of white people and the active division of the United States along racial lines. Merged into one, on the day of those protests, were the forces of subversion.

What the common trait of most of the demonstrators besides their rage? Their age. The youth of the Hispanic community has been forever poisoned by the skinheads of the brown persuasion. Assimilation has clearly failed. This is shown by the fact that not only illegals came forward boldly but also many Hispanics. Assimilation has failed not only because of willful neglect, but because of a cultural exhaustion which is present in America.

Any true government worth its value in taxation would have smashed the demonstrations. Instead, what was the response of our Senate? Swift approval of an amnesty bill which is the most horrendous act of treason ever committed by a “ruling body”. When Rome suffered the Great Migrations it was involuntary, and when it was allowed it was by the whim of the Emperor. Think of the factors involved in our immigration system when reading this:

“This frontier was then accepted as permanent and was strengthened. However, Germans continued to infiltrate in small war bands, and many found service with the Roman army. In the middle of the second century the Romans, because of increasing shortages of manpower for agriculture, for the trades, and for the army, began deliberately to recruit Germans as soldiers. ……... Whole colonies of Germans were given land to settle on under ''guest rights'' in Roman law.”

Now we have Senate acting in the same manner but supposedly representing the people. This level of insanity surpasses all historical examples, and cannot be rationally explained by anyone. The Senate has committed treason. This is without doubt. From wikipedia:

Article Three defines treason as only levying war against the United States or "in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort," and requires the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or a confession in open court for conviction.”

We have millions of witnesses, as a treasonous and odious bill is open to all to read.

“This safeguard may not be foolproof since Congress has, at times passed statutes creating treasonlike offences with different names (such as sedition in the 1789 Alien and Sedition Acts, or espionage and sabotage in the 1917 Espionage Act) which do not require the testimony of two witnesses, and have a much broader definition than Article Three treason.

The Constitution does not itself create the offence, it only restricts the definition. The crime is prohibited by legislation passed by Congress. Therefore the United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 2381 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

Where does this leave the majority of Senators?

We now are suffering under a state of anarchy in the nation which was once very proud of its laws.

This action will have one consequence: the racist brown-pride groups listed above will now have millions of poor, uneducated, and illiterate stooges to manipulate. The Senators are smiling because they actually believe they have this rabid dog under control. But it will turn and bite them. We will all feel its sting, whether we be white or black, brown or yellow, or any combination of “races”. The Second Civil War has already begun:

“Joe Baca, California State Senator, "The Latinos are coming! The Latinos are coming! That's what this agenda is about. It's about assuring that we increase our numbers. That we increase our numbers at every level... We can't go back. We are in a civil war. United, Latinos will win."

The war was declared by the Brown Pride movement long ago. Now our politicians have opened the door to death. The Second Civil War will be a terrible war, more akin to the intifada in Israel than the fields of Appomattox. It will be for the lack of a better term, a race war, begun essentially by the agents of Mexico which flood our nation on a daily basis. The ultimate responsibility for those who will die lays not at the feet of the Mexican government, nor at the racist Latino groups, but squarely at the feet of the foolish American political class, whose crass cowardice could cost our nation everything.


Treason:“Treason” Wikipedia. 1 June 2006.

Great Migration: “Migration Period” Wikipedia 1 June 2006

“Tribal Migrations” Tribal Migrations 1 June 2006

Civil War: “Demographic Warfare” Wikipedia 1 June 2006