Friday, September 30, 2005

Privacy and Fascism

Privacy is only available to the individual. Beyond the privacy of sitting in a locked room, privacy refers to owning ones own life. For the majority of Humans now and throughout history the concept of privacy is unheard of or if known, hated. The atomic individual is outside the control of family, clan, tribe, army, church and state. The atomic individual can stand apart from God Himself. The man in a state of privacy is a permanent exile from group identity. Fascists of all sorts rebel against the very thought of privacy, of individualism, of self-ownership of ones being.The communitarian, Muslim, Leftist or Rightist is against the free individual mind in possession of his being.

One of the battle lines we face is that of privacy versus collectivity. Modern man faces the ummah of Islam. Modern woman faces the enemy of her freedom in the form of the subjugation of women as sanctioned by Islamic and tribal chattel slavery. What is the root cause of Islamic jihad against the rest of the world? One point is individuality. Privacy. He who is free to own his own life is not a slave of Allah. That privacy is atheism.

To the Left dhimmi fascist collectivity is supreme. The same is true for the Rightist fascist who feels that the State is all. And for the Muslim, the ummah is supreme. Within the collective it is the individual who is a menace. He who is private is not working toward the collective goal but toward his own, whatever it might be. And as such, regardless of the collective goal, the individual is not a true believer, is therefore an atheist. He who does not believe in the collective identity's validity is an enemy. That would be us.

Beow we have the first paragraph of a long entry on individualism. We'll come back to this topic again, as we have before, it being central to the thesis that the Left and the Right are fascistic by nature and creed, and that there is little to distinguish those fascisms from Islam.
***

TYPES OF INDIVIDUALISM
"Individualism" is a term ranging over a wide variety
of attitudes, doctrines, and theories, and this diversity
of meaning is only increased when one takes account
of historical shifts in the connotations of the very word
"individual" and its synonyms (Mauss, 1937; Ullmann,
1966). The relation of these various meanings to one
another is largely one of family resemblance, though
"individualism" has usually been understood as expres-
sing some cluster of such meanings, which usually are
either not distinguished from one another or else as-
sumed to be logically or conceptually related.

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv2-66

Thursday, September 29, 2005

They Shoot Protestors, Don't They?

Our friends at Pedestrian Infidel are following the story of the African migrants who swarmed over the border fence in Spanish Morocco trying desperately to get themselves into Europe by any means available. Te post below comes with insightful editorial and some very fine grapics.

http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com

The story is catchy, and we're following it as well. It's a snapshot of the future --for those who care for these things.

We have below the pot smoking hippie kids' version of reality and the evil that Americans do. Blame their parents? No, too late. Their parents are likely pot-smoking hippies too. The first narrative is from an African migrant's point of view, and the last piece is on Minutemen confronting other Americans opposed to them and who knows what else. We find it interesting to see the difference between the two realities in America, and we think it shows clearly the nature of a divided future with migrants overrunning the lot of us, walls or no, unless something is done quickly not only to prevent the hordes from overwhelming the Modern world but to distance the fascist Left dhimmis from the clouded view of reality they so much seem attached to.

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20050928025503375

Welcome to Infoshop News
Thursday, September 29 2005 @ 02:55 PM PDT

Meanwile outside of Menilla... Spanish border breached en masse

Wednesday, September 28 2005 @ 02:55 AM PDT
Contributed by: Anonymous
Views: 53

Borders In the night of sunday 28, almost 300 subsaharian migrants tried to cross the border between Morocco and Melilla (Spain). The plan was organized in the (self- organized) camp "Gurugú" that is in the forest near the border. With more than 50 handmade stairs and connected by mobile phones started the "assault" to the border.

from noborder.org

02.Sep.05 - In the night of sunday 28, almost 300 subsaharian migrants tried to cross the border between Morocco and Melilla (Spain). The plan was organized in the (self- organized) camp "Gurugú" that is in the forest near the border. With more than 50 handmade stairs and connected by mobile phones started the "assault" to the border. In the beginning more than 70 could cross when lots of spanish militar police (Guardia Civil)arrived and started a brutal repression. After 45 minutes of confrontation (and with the presence already of the Moroccan police) 2 migrants from Cameroon died and there are lots of injured people.



The situation is now in the first page of all spanish newspapers and the minister of interior probably will have to explain in the parlament. Yesterday took place (as we all expected) a brutal intervention in the camp again with lots of injured people and detentions.

Here is a very rough translation of the communiqué posted on estrecho.indymedia.org

The morning of monday, 08.29 has been tragic. Two comrades from Camerun left with us towards the gate that separates the Mariguari Mountain, in Morocco, from the city of Melilla.

We were a number, the cops were looking for us: it's a fight, a struggle, as it uses to be. But the struggle is unfair, they have gases that asphyxiate us, they have plastic bullets. They have real bullets too, and sometimes you can hear them at night. We have our hands and our feet, and the idea not to react. What is important is the collective, and it is the hope that sustained us along the way to Europe from our origin countries. Two, three years we were on this way.

The cops have long truncheons too, falling hardly and quickly on our bodies, breaking our bones and our hope. Some of these truncheon are electrified, and you can feel your body trembling, you cannot breath anymore, and you feel that you are dying.

This day was as many other. This time there were no Moroccan cops, it was us and the Spanish guardia civil. Many of us went through the gate, we were in Melilla, the guardia civil opened the little door and sent us back to Morocco. The cops sent back the wounded, the healthy. And they sent back two dead bodies.

The night was dark, we were afraid that the Moroccan military could come and deport us to Oujda (on the border with Algeria), finishing the job of the guardia civil. So we hid in the bush. Only in the morning we found the body of one of our brothers, apparenly dead. We also saw in the light of the dawn the heads of the police close to the gate, and we realized that something terrible had happened. The Moroccan said that there was another dead body.

We were standing close to the corpse, we made a couple of phone call, asking for help, trying to make the international authorities aware of what was happening. Somebody came, filmed saw and could witness that we are saying the truth. Also Mediciens sans Frontieres saw the wounded and one of the corpses, they also know that one of the two dead had his stomach wounded. Why then all this silence?

We, the illegal as they call us, the one that have no voice, swear by our dignity (because, although they kill us we still have our dignity as human beings) that we witnessed how our comrades have been hit untill death, that the Spanish cops opened up the little door and threw the two corpses away towards Morocco as if they were dogs.

And we now that we will return to the gate. Many of us are escaping from hunger and war, but we are not afraid: although all the officials leave us alone, we know that we are human beings and that we did not do anything, that the murderers are not among us, and that at least god knows all this.

We ask all social organizations to join this call for justice.
We ask all organizations that witnessed the facts to denounce them.
We demand from the Spanish government to respect art. 157 of the immigration law.
We demand from the Spanish government the end of torture at the border in Ceuta and Melilla.

[more info in spanish at http://estrecho.indymedia.org]
***



Thursday, September 29 2005 @ 02:59 PM PDT

Minutemen Threaten to Shoot Protesters

Monday, July 18 2005 @ 09:29 AM PDT
Contributed by: Anonymous
Views: 311

Borders On Saturday, July 16th the Calilfornia Minutemen (formerly known as the Border Patrol Auxiliary) began armed civilian patrols of the border near Campo, CA. In response, more than 150 anti-Minutemen protesters converged in Campo to send a message that they should "go home."

Video of this event is available online at
http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2005/07/109906.shtml


PRESS RELEASE: For Immediate Release

Subject: Minutemen Threaten to Shoot Protesters (and their mothers)

From: The Buenas Noches Brigade, an affinity group of Gente Unida

Incident Date: July 16, 2005

Incident Time: Approximately 11:30pm

Location: Campo, CA (along the U.S./Mexico Border Fence)

BACKGROUND: On Saturday, July 16th the Calilfornia Minutemen (formerly known as the Border Patrol Auxiliary) began armed civilian patrols of the border near Campo, CA. In response, more than 150 anti-Minutemen protesters converged in Campo to send a message that they should "go home."

A primary purpose of the protest was to disrupt the California Minutemen's ability to conduct their patrols. Numerous individuals and affinity groups focused on daytime activities, conducting two protests at the VFW office (one at 12:30pm and another at approximately 5:00pm). The protests clearly aggravated the California Minutemen.

The Buenas Noches Brigade was formed to draw attention to the location of the California Minutemen during their evening patrols. Our goal was to subvert their ability to conduct their vigilante activities. In a
sense of irony, we chose to adopt tactics similar to when the California Minutemen intercept people who cross their path (as dictated by James Chase on their website). Their tactics include: introducing themselves
("Buenos noches, Senor"), floodlights, non-physical engagement and friendly dialog.

INCIDENT: Our efforts at applying said tactics were met with intense hostility and threats of violence. The video we have submitted with this press release shows us attempting to engage the California Minutemen in a lighthearted, humorous manner and their response. Because we were more than 300 yards away, there are limited visuals, but you can clearly hear threats such as "you come down here and you will be engaged in a firefight", "...I will shoot your motherfucking ass," and
"you wanna play, let's play motherfucker." (Full transcripts follow).

Our main intention for sending this release is to illustrate the two faces of the Minutemen. They portray themselves as law-abiding, peaceful, public servants but only slight provocation results in a willingness to use lethal force. They are clearly dangerous and their
presence in California should not be tolerated.

The Buenas Noches Brigade will be in Campo as long as the California Minutemen are in Campo.

CONTACT INFO: Due to the serious nature of the threats made by at least one Minuteman, and our desire to not get our "motherfucking asses shot",
we would prefer to keep our identities anonymous. We are, however, willing to reveal ourselves to reporters as necessary. You can contact our intermediary at xxx-xxx-xxxx.

TRANSCRIPT (partial):

Minuteman: ...let me make this very clear to you, we are armed and we will defend ourselves. This is not like the VFW. You come down here and you will be engaged in a firefight if necessary. Get the fuck out
and go home."

Buenas Noches Brigade: So what kind of song do you want to hear (laughter)?

Minuteman: We are going up the hill to see your ass.

Buenas Noches Brigade: I don't have that song (laughter).

Minuteman: If you engage me with a gun, I will defend myself and I will shoot your motherfucking ass.

Buenas Noches Brigade: We're being threatened with guns. So you are threatening us?

That's a threat.

Tell him we have video cameras...(loudly) We have video cameras.

Minuteman: Listen assholes, you wanna play? Let's play motherfucker, let's go!

Buenas Noches Brigade: Let's get out of here.

Thanks, that'll be live on CNN tonight, "l'm gonna shoot your ass, motherfucker."

Minuteman: Play it any way you want, asshole.

Buenas Noches Brigade: CNN, ABC, NBC...

Minuteman: That's your mother on all three channels!


Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) Take-over

It's near the end of the world as we know it. Rightwing lunatics are taking over the airwaves, and only a small but dedicted cadre of smart people can save us. Our heroes!

The world needs these clear thinking non-partisan intellectuals to set the world right again. Otherwise we're all doomed to be enslaved and murdered by Right-wing fundamentalist Christian war mongers and real estate developers. If you care about the world you live in and the starving orphans of Africa, please send money to me so I can change the world for the better. I'll provide love beads and bell bottom pants to all the capitalists so they can see what it's like to live like poor people. Wow, man. The Christian fundamentalists Nazis in the White House and the Republican Party are killing everybody for profit. Who wrote the editorial below? We don't know, and it doesn't matter cause that'd be just more capitalist private property stuff, and the writer/publisher didn't put a name to it. But it's news. News to me.
***

http://www.bostonphoenix.com

The radical-right-wing takeover of America continues. The latest successful target: the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).

CPB has two jobs. It distributes $400 million worth of taxpayers' money to National Public Radio and the television-oriented Public Broadcasting Service. And it is supposed to insulate these two nonprofit outfits from political interference.

With the election of Cheryl Halpern, a Republican fundraiser and New Jersey real-estate developer, as chairwoman, the CPB ceases to be a nonpartisan buffer and becomes a totally controlled arm of the Bush administration, which favors corporate interests over the citizenry, plunders the environment, co-opts the federal court system, subverts civil liberties, promotes Christian fundamentalism, and is waging an ill-conceived war in Iraq.

Reacting with concern to this latest development in the ongoing hijacking of public broadcasting, the Center for Digital Democracy called for two steps of essential reform: "No activist from either political party should be nominated to the board. Nor should anyone be permitted to serve simultaneously on another government-funded entity."

These measures would keep political hacks from screwing with public broadcasting, which for all its faults � is still a beacon of diversity compared with the corporate interests that monopolize so much of what�s available over the public airwaves, which belong to the American people.

When the current system of public broadcasting was established in 1967, the commission that laid its foundation said that the CPB board should be made up of "distinguished and public-spirited citizens" dedicated to creating an institution "of great significance to American society."

Shortly after that, a war-mongering president who was also an enemy of the constitution, Richard Nixon, sought to bend the public-broadcasting system to suit his own narrow purposes. The damage Nixon sought to inflict was stopped. Bush, however, is much better entrenched. If the work of his cronies is not undone, the nation will have to start thinking about how public broadcasting, a jewel in the dented and tarnished crown of national culture, can survive without public subsidy. That is if it can survive at all.
***

Do we laugh or cry? It's not obvious that the writer above is a teenager living in his mother's basement. He/she might well be a highly paid journalist with a corner office off the Commons. Maybe, and it's possible, this idiot works for the CIA. Maybe he's a grad. student at Harvard. Anything's possible. Tears run down my cheeks.

Hamas Comedy Hour

The Most Important People in the World are back in the news today. Nevermind the Sudanese being slaughtered everyday. Forget about the Kurds. The Hindus in India killed by Muslims? They're not important. What about the Palestinians? They're the only people on Earth anyone should concern themselves with, and below we can see why:

Hamas Missteps Provoked Israel, Observers say

Stewart Ain - Staff Writer
An Israeli security officer carries a Palestinian Kassam rocket fired last weekend. It struck an open field.  Getty Images

A series of miscalculations by Hamas was being seen as triggering Israel's assault on the terrorist organization throughout the Gaza Strip and West Bank this week, an offensive that Israel promises will not end until the group's ability to renew Kassam rocket attacks on Israeli targets has been destroyed.

Vice Premier Shimon Peres told Israel Radio Wednesday that it was "impossible to administer peace or negotiations until terrorists are disarmed. We must quash the terror at its roots."

The Israeli military threatened to destroy an entire Gaza town if more rockets were fired from there.

"The rules of the game have changed," Gerald Steinberg, a political science professor at Bar-Ilan University, said of Israel's decision to ignore Hamas claims that it had ordered an end to the rocket attacks.

"The Palestinians don't have any credibility," he explained. "Israel has heard these words for years. Attacks would stop and they would use the quiet to regroup. That is not going to happen this time. The country [Israel] does not want to see us going back to the old system."
***
The Israeli military offensive, which included raids on Hamas offices in the West Bank and the arrest of more than 400 Hamas members, followed a barrage of Kassam rockets — nearly 40 in all — into southern Israel Saturday, injuring six people.

The attack came in response to what Hamas claimed was Israeli aircraft missile fire into a crowd gathered for a military parade last Friday at the Jabalya refugee camp. The blast reportedly killed 21 people, including a 7-year-old boy.

Israel denied responsibility for the blast, and a spokesman for the Palestinian Authority claimed the explosion was caused by Hamas' own homemade rockets. Masked gunmen later tried to assassinate the spokesman.

On Tuesday, a forensic report published by the explosives unit of the Palestinian Authority's Interior Ministry said shrapnel found in the bodies of those killed resembled that used in the noses of Hamas' Kassam rockets.

Guy Bechor, head of the Middle East Department at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center, said Hamas found itself caught in a Catch-22 — taking responsibility would have meant admitting to criminal negligence and blaming Israel forced it to "retaliate."

"They became victims of their own slogans and declarations," Bechor said. "They were almost obliged to do something against Israel."

Abu Mustafa, a campaign coordinator at Hamas' regional campaign headquarters in Ramallah who used another name for fear of arrest, said he also believed the Hamas leadership in Gaza erred.

"It is unfortunate that Hamas launched the attacks," he said. "Had I been the decision maker in this situation I wouldn't have done this.

"Our leadership are not saints. It is the military wing of the Hamas that makes the mistakes.… It was wrong to retaliate, especially now that Hamas is on the verge of embarking on a political process."

Mustafa added that the declaration of Hamas leader Mahmoud A-Zahar earlier this week that attacks from Gaza would end was an attempt at "damage control."

Hassan Barghouti, a Ramallah-based political analyst, said that not only had Hamas made a mistake in its attack on Israel, but that its public standing among Palestinians has been further damaged — an erosion that began with the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip earlier this month.

"After the disengagement, Hamas lost a little bit in Gaza, and after what happened in Jabalya and the retaliation, they are losing more," he said. "Gazans are celebrating because of the withdrawal. And there is no logic to risk an Israeli invasion because of Hamas rockets. The Gazan people want quiet."

Diana Buttu, the press officer for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, termed Hamas' attack and Israel's response "one of the most unfortunate events."

"It largely backfired on Hamas," she told members of the Israel Policy Forum in a conference call Tuesday from Gaza City. "Rather than bowing its head and saying I'm sorry and it [parading around with live explosives] shouldn't have happened, it had a knee-jerk reaction to cover it up."

Buttu added that the erosion of support for Hamas has continued "because people see that these things are unwarranted and cowardly." But she said Hamas could recover support in time for parliamentary elections Jan. 25 should the international community not come through with its pledge of $3 billion in aid to the Palestinian Authority that was to be used for a host of projects, including new housing and roads.

"The fear is that around election time Hamas will pick up on this and say that the Palestinian Authority is corrupt, that Israel and the international community have failed the Palestinians, and that it will have to take the situation into its own hands," she said.

Bechor said Hamas' kidnapping and execution of Israeli businessman Sasson Nuriel this week — ostensibly to pressure Israel into releasing Palestinian prisoners — reflected the group's attempt to show itself as fighting for Palestinian prisoners at a time when the Palestinian Authority is not. But showing a video of Nuriel bound and blindfolded in a manner similar to captives held by terrorists in Iraq has backfired, he said.

"This is totally for the elections, but they did not consider the outcome," Bechor said. "They didn't consider the international damage. … It's creating great damage for Hamas and great damage to the PA, which is doing nothing to stop that."

Israel correspondent Joshua Mitnick contributed to this report.

Thai Muslim Insurgency and Internationalism


In Thailand there is another war against the civilized world being waged by our Muslim cousins. They just don't stop. Perhaps they can't. Maybe the poison of Islam is so deadly that there's nothing for them to do but die. Below we have three pieces culled from the press by agonist.org on the recent butchery of Thai military men by Muslims men protected by Muslim women villagers who prevented Thai police from saving their comrades. Following that is an abridged piece from a U.S. military writer on the history and current situation in Thailand.

We lead this post with a short excerpt from wikipedia on the International Brigades of the Spanish Civil War. It is our position that as there is considered to be one united ummah, one nation of true believers in Islam, so too must there be one united effort to combat Islam, to beat it to the ground, and to exterminate it forever. We include the note on the International Brigade as evidence that such things can be done. The following pieces on Thailand's Muslim insurgency show that we must do something to stop it, if not in Thailand, elsewhere. Thailand serves as an example of a territory outside the bounds of law regarding those who are not Thai. It's a clear algebraic example of the unknown factor being obvious once it is known.

We don't, of course, advocate that anyone would go to Thailand to engage in mercenary activities. Our point here is in conjunction with earlier posts that in the world of illegitimate law one need not obey the law. Mercenaries in foreign lands are still mercenaries, regardless of the purity of their souls. They still have no legal protection as soldiers. But then, if one were to engage an enemy that has no regard for the conventions of war it shouldn't come as any surprise to find that one is treated poorly regardless of ones legal position as an enemy combatant. The only point of interest here is that one must, prudentially, remain out of the bounds of criminality within the laws of ones own national legitimate law.
***

International Brigades

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The International Brigades were units created of volunteers and mercenaries who travelled to Spain to fight against the "Nationalist" forces led by General Francisco Franco and helped by Nazi German and fascist Italian forces, and defend the legitimate Spanish Republic government in the Spanish Civil War between 1936 and 1939.

40,000 men and women were enrolled in the Brigades. As many as 10,000 of them never returned. 50 nationalities were represented in the Brigades (during the Battle of Madrid, the XIIth Brigade counted representatives from no fewer than 17 nationalities in its ranks)
***

http://agonist.org/story/2005/9/22/195252/843

Insurgents plunge Thailand into security crisis
Jan McGirk | Bangkok | Sept 23

The Independent - The south of Thailand has been thrown into a security crisis after two marines were roped together, then beaten and hacked to death by a mob that accused them of being part of an undercover death squad.

The Prime Minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, vowed to track down their killers. Analysts said the incident could lead to a further escalation in a separatist insurgency in provinces with a Muslim majority, which has killed more than 1,000 people over the past 21 months. There were fears the violence could spill over into tourist areas such as Pattaya and Phuket. Malaysia placed security forces on alert along its northern border to prevent any spillover of the violence. Muslim rubber-tappers and labourers expressed fear of reprisal killings.
***

At least 500 villagers had surrounded Sub-Lieutenant Vinai Nabut and Petty Officer Khamthon Thongeiat as they were pulled from an unmarked car moments after a fatal shooting at a local teashop. Four other customers were wounded in this attack, which reminded villagers of an attack in June in which the cleric of the local mosque was hit. Before dying, he identified his assailants as government agents in plain clothes.

Hundreds of women with small children blockaded the road into Tanyonglimo village in Narwathiwat province, and prevented the rescue of the marines during a 19-hour stand-off that ended on Wednesday afternoon.

Officials insisted that the armed marines, although out of uniform, were pursuing intelligence leads and were not part of any death squad. "It was a coincidence that the two marines came when the shooting happened," Thammarak Issrangkura Na Ayutthaya, the Defence Minister, said. Some reports said their car had stalled in the crowd.

The village headman, Romoeli Tingi, said relatives of the tea shop shooting victims did not believe the marines had fired the shots, and had planned to let them go. After the marines were tied up, they were given water and food, and villagers demanded Malaysian reporters who could understand their dialect be summoned.

By the time the reporters arrived, negotiations no longer were possible. Later, Mr Romoeli complained that milling crowds of outsiders may have provoked the killings. "More than half of them were not from this village," he said. Witnesses said that while elders left to pray in the mosque next door, three hooded militants rushed in to stab the marines, then bludgeoned them with a sledgehammer and iron staves.

more at link Insurgents plunge Thailand into security crisis
***

Fri Sep 23rd, 2005 at 09:32:23 AM PDT (none / 0) #1
candy (User Info)
Muslim women, children shield marine killers

Sep 24, 2005

Muslim women, children shield marine killers
By Richard S Ehrlich

BANGKOK - Suspected Islamist insurgents avoided capture after torturing to death two Thai marines by beating and stabbing the bound-and-gagged victims behind a human shield of defiant Muslim women and children, horrifying the government and plunging southern Thailand into a fresh security crisis.

Amid the world's most violent Islamist insurgency outside Iraq, angry and confused security forces hunted the elusive killers, described as three or four young men who ran away, leaving the marines' bloodied bodies in Tanyong Limo village.

"They were brutally beaten to death with machetes and sticks, while their hands and legs were tied up, and they were gagged and blindfolded," Lieutenant General Kwanchart Klaharn, commander of the Fourth Army and director of the Southern Border Provinces Peace-building Command, told reporters.

The bodies were locked inside a building near a mosque, prompting security forces to break down a door to gain access before transporting them to a hospital morgue, he said.

The brutality of the killings - coupled with the security forces' failed attempt to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the hostage crisis and the inability of the armed marines to defend themselves - was urgently being examined by politicians, peace activists, army generals and the Thai media.

"We will absolutely not let those two die for nothing. The law is the law," an agitated Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra told journalists after the killings Wednesday during a 19-hour stalemate between troops and villagers in violence-torn Narathiwat province.

"If I could, I would drop napalm bombs all over that village," a distraught Captain Traikwan Krairiksh was quoted in the Bangkok Post as saying after he viewed the bodies of his former subordinates in a pool of blood. "But the fact is, I can never do that. We are soldiers. We must follow the law. We can only take revenge by using the law."

Throughout the stand-off, scores of shouting Muslim women dressed in traditional headscarves stood with children, blocking troops from gaining access to the hostages, and erecting banners that blamed the authorities, including one in Thai that read: "You are in fact the terrorists."

Apparently hoping for a peaceful solution, troops did not attempt a forced rescue. The two experienced marines, armed with a US-supplied M-16 assault rifle and two pistols, were initially captured on Tuesday night when they stopped their vehicle near the village.

Locals blamed them for the drive-by shooting death of two men dining at a nearby tea shop earlier in the night, but authorities later explained that the marines were pursuing the unidentified killers and were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

More than 1,000 people on all sides have died in southern Thailand since January 4, 2004 when the smoldering rebellion flared in a so-called "night of the fires" attack on security forces, including synchronized arson assaults on 21 schools and a massive raid on a military base that netted the rebels hundreds of guns and heavy weapons.

Today, about 100 years after Thailand annexed the mostly ethnic Malay Muslim region, "mujahideen" holy warriors yearn for a separate state ruled by Islamic sharia law in a lush, tropical region where Islamists are waging similar insurgencies in the Philippines, Indonesia and elsewhere.

No one is sure who leads the increasingly sophisticated, disciplined and successful Muslim fighters in southern Thailand. The government blames indigenous rebel groups, allied with local Islamic schools, that are inspired by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and by Osama bin Laden's call to force non-believers from Muslim territories.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/GI24Ae01.html

***

Following is a lengthy essay by a military writer on Thailand's Mulsim insurgency. We have abridged it severely, but the whole piece is worth the time to read in its entirety.
***

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2005/Feb/croissantfeb05.asp

Unrest in South Thailand: Contours, Causes, and Consequences Since 2001

Strategic Insights, Volume IV, Issue 2 (February 2005)

by Aurel Croissant
Strategic Insights
Center for Contemporary Conflict
Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.


Introduction

Historically speaking, Thailand is no stranger to armed conflict. Between the 1960s and early 1980s, the government fought an armed communist insurgency. Muslim separatists were active in the southern region of the country from the 1940s until the late 1980s. At the end of the 1990s, however, it seemed the Kingdom had solved its insurgency problem. The communist movement was dissolved and terrorism and political violence in the southern provinces was waning. In the past three years, however, southern Thailand has seen a recrudescence of long-dormant Malay-Muslim anger against the central government. The internal security situation in the country's southernmost provinces has rapidly worsened and worries are arising that the country will become another hotspot of Islamist terrorism in Southeast Asia.

This raises some critical questions: What is the conflict about? Why is violence rising? Who is behind the violence? How can Thailand counter this new wave of insurgency? What are the consequences for domestic politics?

This paper will discuss these questions. Section I describes the historical roots and the patterns of the conflict in Thailand's south until the late 1990s. Section II provides an outline of the current wave of insurgency. Section III examines causes for the latest outburst of violence. And Section IV discusses options for viable conflict solutions and the possible consequences for democracy in Thailand.

I. Historical Roots

Muslims comprise 5.5% of Thailand's population.[1] Notwithstanding its relatively small size, the relationship between the Buddhist majority of the population and the government in Bangkok and particularly the Malay-Muslim minority in the southern region is of crucial importance for political stability and security in Thailand and Southeast Asia. While Muslim communities exist all over the country, by far the greatest number of Muslims living in Thailand, however, is of Malay ethnic origin. As the only Muslim population in the country, they share a common ethnic identity and form a locally concentrated minority in the Patani Raya region,[2] which had been an independent Kingdom until 1786 when Patani was conquered by the King of Siam and the Muslim dynasty was abolished.[3] The efforts of the Siamese government to subjugate the Muslim areas began immediate after its incorporation but became more hostile only after the Anglo-Siamese treaties of 1904 and 1909 which recognized the Siamese control over Pattani.[4]

With King Chulalonkorn's administrative reforms in the 1890s, the Kingdom developed a centralized bureaucracy and established central control over most of its territory. Doing so, the central government in Bangkok was strong enough that it did not have to cut autonomy deals with the local Muslim rulers. Rather, the government eliminated local elites as a politically relevant player, as governors and bureaucrats were sent from Bangkok down to the southern provinces.[5] The government divided Pattani into seven provinces which were governed by appointed bureaucrats under a centralized administrative structure.

Thailand's southern region

Source: http://flagspot.net/flags/th(s.html.

From the late nineteenth century on, the royal government developed a policy of nation-building from above, which forced the transformation of the multi-ethnic society of Siam into a unified Thai nation. In the south, however, Bangkok managed dissidence mostly by leaving the Muslims alone. This laissez faire policy changed shortly before and during World War Two when the country saw an acceleration of political efforts to assimilate the southern population.[6] When the ultranationalist regime of Phibun came to power in 1938, it followed a policy of enforced assimilation of the various minorities cultures into the mainstream Buddhist "Thai-ness"[7] in order to develop, in David Brown's version, "the mono-ethnic character of the state."[ 8] In the 1940s, this provoked the emergence of a separatist movement fighting for an independent Pattani. In 1948, the Gabungan Melayu Patani Raya (Union of Malay for a Great Patani) was founded in 1948. Following the setting up of the Barisan National Pembebasan Patani (BNPP) in 1963, violent clashes between insurgents and the security forces were the rule in the southernmost provinces.[9] In the mid-1970s more than 20 separatist organizations agitated on both sides of the Thai-Malaysian border.

In the 1980s and 1990s, however, the situation changed. The new government under General Prem (1980-88) stopped the assimilation policy; instead, it supported Muslim cultural rights and religious freedoms, offered the guerilla a general amnesty, and implemented an economic development plan for the south.[10] In the 1990s, the democratic government formulated a new "National Security Policy for the Southern Border Provinces" based on a "development as security" approach, which was supposed to be implemented during 1999-2003.[11] Deepened cooperation between the Thai and Malaysian authorities improved security along the borderland, which contributed to the decline of the insurgency movement as well.[12] Most observers described it, thus, as "waning" and "relatively quit" at the late 1990s.[ 13]

II. The Recent Drift Towards Militancy

Even though Thailand's south contains fourteen provinces, the great majority of Thailand's Muslims live in the four southernmost provinces of Satun, Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat. A recent household survey conducted by the Thai government found that over 76 per cent of the population in these four provinces adhered to the Islamic faith.[14] These provinces are also hotspots of recent violence and insurgency, accounting for most clashes and violent incidences in the current wave of unrest.
***

Escalating Violence

The latest outburst of violence started in 2001. While in the years 1993-2000, there were only a few incidents of separatist violence, accounting only for a handful of casualties, Ministry of the Interior statistics show and increase of violence from 2001 on. In 2001 alone, 19 killed policemen and 50 insurgency-related incidents across the three most affected provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat. In 2002, several police stations were attacked when the guerillas seized huge amounts of arms and ammunitions and killed some 50 police and soldiers in 75 incidents throughout the year. In 2003 official sources counted 119 incidents. The latest outburst of violence began on January 2004 when about 30 armed men stormed the army depot in Narathiwat, stealing 300 weapons and killing four Thai soldiers. During the ten months between January and end of October 2004, over 500 people reportedly have been killed in more than 900 insurgency-related incidents, including civilians, police, soldiers, and other government officials.[15] On October 25, 2004, the death of 84 Muslims at the provincial town of Tak Bai, once again elevated the conflict.[ 16] Recent killings in Songkhla[17] raise fears that violence could spill over into neighboring areas

The recent assassination of a private Islamic school teacher and the wounding of four others in gun attacks in Pattani and Yala raise concerns that members of the security forces or local village defensemen could adopt the insurgents' tactics to pay personal bills and to spread counter-violence.[18] Separately, some 20,000 members of the notorious right-wing Village Scouts organization rallied in November 2004 to prove their determination to drive out the "separatist enemies" in the south out of the country. This added to the fears by human-rights groups and civil society activists that ultranationalist elements may open a Pandora's Box of nationalist backlash against what members of these groups view as a threat to monarchy, Buddhism, and the nation.[19]

Responding to the emergent crisis, the government enforced martial law in Narathiwat, Yala and Pattani, and deployed than 12,000 Royal Thai Army troops in the region. Although several mobile units are dispatched to protect teachers and civil servants, public order and infrastructure are eroding.[20] The educational system, for instance, came under serious stress after more than 1,200 teachers and education officials sought transfers out of the region; almost 1,000 schools in the three southernmost provinces had to be temporarily closed because parents were afraid to send their children to school. Several provincial court judges have also submitted requests for transfers out of the region following the killing of judges by Muslim separatists in 2004.[21]

Actors

Both the scope and co-ordination of operations point to new dynamics within the traditionally factionalized and ineffectual separatist movement. Despite large intelligence and internal security apparatus in the south, different government agencies do not seem to have a clear understanding of the groups involved in the violence.[22] It is clear, however, that several factions remain core actors in the insurgency.[ 23] Even though any account on these groups has to be taken with a grain of salt, it seems that the original PULO, although it is still active and maintains a website in English, Thai and Malay language (http://www.pulo.org/), does not have much military power on the ground. BNP/BIPP is largely defunct and Bersatu—an umbrella organization attempting loose political coordination among separatist groups — is believed to have no direct military operations in Thailand. Of the three remaining factions, New PULO is believed to be the smallest. GMIP may have a wider area of operations but the largest of the three main factions most certainly is BRM.[24]
***

What role ordinary criminals and religious authorities in the recent development play is controversial. Insurgent groups operate in a grey zone of crime and delinquent sub-culture on the one hand, and ethnic or religious consciousness on the other. As insurgents rely to some extent on the same infrastructure as criminals, it is likely that criminal gangs, bandits, and drug traffickers joined the Muslim insurgents in recent years. For many decades, Thailand has been at the key route for Golden Triangle drug trafficking to international markets. Furthermore, Thailand is a hotspot of small arms trade, with the military itself involved in the black markets for arms.[25] Given the ubiquity of organized and petty crime, small-arms trade, smuggling, and drug trafficking in the south, it would be naïve to assume that criminals and terrorists can be clearly distinguished. Rather, a more plausible assumption is that there is a broad grey zone of greed and grievance in which there is no clear threshold between 'entrepreneurs of violence' and 'warriors of convenience. Furthermore, there are no jao pho—major provincial bosses of a distinctly Mafioso variety who have penetrated politics and economics in Thailand in the past three decades[26]in the deep south. Pasuk and Sungsidh suggest that the existence of well-established local elites in many southern towns impeded the rise of new jao pho in the last three decades, while strong communist guerilla activities in the 1960s and 1970s "may have acted as a counterweight to the growth of new local potentates."[27] If this view is correct, crime in the south lacks the kind of informal controls and restraints that are exercised by individual godfathers in other provinceswhich facilitates recruitment from criminal gangs for insurgent groups and, simultaneously, deepens the intelligence services' problem of tracking down the specific links between crime and insurgency.

Furthermore, as reported in October 2003, intelligence sources have been in no doubt that some religious schools (ponohs) had lent themselves to paramilitary groups. Reportedly, young Islamic teachers from Islamic boarding schools serve as recruiting officers and field commanders for insurgency groups, particularly the BRN.[28]

Another key unknown is the involvement of external groups. Some observers point to outside sources for providing training facilities, funds, motivation and instigation to the Muslim insurgents in southern Thailand, for example, Malaysian militants of the KMM and pro-Al-Qaeda groups in Bangladesh and Pakistan, and groups involved in arms-trade to Aceh, Mindanao, and Sri Lanka.[ 29] Thus far, however, there is no clear evidence of any direct involvement of either Jemaah Islamiya or Al-Qaeda in the insurgency. Furthermore, against such a connection speaks that violence so far is limited to the southernmost provinces. There is also a clear difference in operational methods. No attacks have been started on Western-style soft targets (tourism centers, western consulates, backpackers etc.) in the south, which are typically preferred by JI and other Al-Qaeda affiliated groups. Instead, the recent insurgents have established a broad range of low-intensity, low-risk tactics that are difficult to counter by the security forces. These tacticsmainly arsons, bombings, attacks against state workers, law-enforcement personnel, local government officials, schoolteachers, and on Buddhist monks in particular, and raids aimed at seizing armsserve the double purpose of destabilizing the region and shocking the Thai public, thereby weakening the central government's position.
***

Again, we strongly recommend reading the entire essay. It's well written, highly informative, and insightful. We can look at this situation in Thailand as the shape of the future of Europe as well as of far-flung areas of Asia. We can also look at this as one more domino, as it were, in the falling string of nations under the weight of Islamic defeat and self-annihilation. This is the future of our world.

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

A link to Intro on Citizenship.

http://www.claremont.org/writings/precepts/050928.html.

The link above announces a speech upcoming on the nature of citizenship.

We find the topic interesting in light of the changes of man's relationship to the state in times of conflict between non-state actors such as pan-state Islamic terrorists and the average state national.

We have argued here that the modern nation state is irrelevant to the concerns of the cosmopolitian Modernist, and that it's against the tribal code of Islam, making the nation state pointless to anyone other than employees at the passport office. And having argued our points, the end result is "So what?" The nation state remains. The question remains: What is man's relationship to the state, and what is the state's relationship to the citizen? The link above introduces the thesis of the lecture upcoming. We think it will be of interest, and if we can find out how to make the computer work we'll provide more coverage.

In Secular Defense of the Canon


One might be sorely pressed in arguing for Bible studies in the general realm if one claims to be a liberal secular Humanist. The ACLU, for example, side with the constitutionalists in separating church from state, and for the most part, so too do Humanists. But what is the legitimate point of stripping the educational culture of its reference points, of denying educational service to the population at large on the grounds of separating church from state? Is this an over-reaction, in short, throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

There is a neo-fascist meme about the land that the canonical literature of the West is a plot by capitalists to reinforce the alienation of the workers, to reify imperialist triumph, and to dominate other "peoples of colour" for reasons of innate White racism. Clear out the racist, sexist, capitalist hegemony of canonical literature from the educational system, one of the great determinist factors in the general wage-slave system of capitalism, and replace it with post-modernist fascist inclusions, and life will follow properly to utopia from there. No Bible studies. Not only because of the separation of church and state on Enlightenment anti-feudalist grounds, ie the grounds upon which the Constitution are based, but because of the determining factor of capitalist reinforcement of the capitalist hegemony. (At times it's an attractive thought to have a giant biblioclastic orgy featuring Foucault.)

So one non-ideological liberal secular Humanist might argue, without reference to socialist determinism, that literature itself is valid in its own terms qua literature, immediately putting him/herself (according to Left fascism)in the camp of non-socialist determinants who must dismiss him/her as victim of alienation and false-consciousness. The losers are those who start from the premise that literature is inherently political and totally supportive by nature of the dominant ideology, having no validity in itself, losers because they begin from the premise of literature as ideology: there is no literature, there is only political writing in support of or counter to ideology.

While one might support the separation of church and state as a liberal secular Humanist on liberal Humanist grounds one must still find room in a free debate to argue non-ideologicallly that literature supercedes the idiocies of Left dogma and socialist relativist moralizing for the fascist agenda. That, of course, is merely opinion, a summary of our postion.

There is some spectral sense of correction in the meme as it is, a sense that things have gone pear-shaped in the system of learning, and that our cultural references are alien to us literally if not, as the Left would have it, socio-economically. Yes, Bible study reinforces the norms of Judeo-Christian/ Greco-Roman culture. For the Left fascist that is enemy territory. The liberal struggle to reclaim the canonical literature for the sake of the general culture on the grounds of aesthetics and qua literature, as Human-socio-cultural benefit, good, bad, or indifferent, is fought on some slippery slopes, to be sure, and not all of the struggle for free inquiry is straight-forward, but there has to be some commonality in a culture of worth, which we might live to see the end of if we do not recalaim the canonical literature and its heritage as at least some beginning. There wil be battle fought in the streets over these issues.

Below, taken from the Pew Forum on Religion we have one shot in the battle for and against society's values.
***

September 24, 2005
A Bible Textbook Begat by Church-State Separation

by K. Connie Kang
Los Angeles Times

What happened on the road to Damascus? (A: Jesus was crucified. B: Mary met an angel of the Lord. C: St. Paul was blinded by a vision from God. D: Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss.)

Only a third of the American teenagers in a nationwide Gallup poll last year correctly answered the first question, attributing the quote from Genesis to Cain. And, a similar percentage of the 1,002 teens in the survey were aware of the story of St. Paul being blinded by a vision from God on the road to Damascus.

An overwhelming majority of the nation's students are biblically illiterate, educators say. Yet, they add, knowledge of the Bible, its characters and references is essential in understanding Western literature, art, music and history even for students who come from other religious traditions, are agnostics or are atheists. On Thursday, a new textbook designed to help teach public high school students biblical content without violating the separation of church and state was released in Washington, D.C., by the Bible Literacy Project, a nonprofit group that promotes the study of Bible content, not belief, in public and private schools.

The project, funded by the John Templeton Foundation, has the endorsement of scholars, some 1st Amendment experts and officials from such organizations as the American Jewish Congress and the National Assn. of Evangelicals. Titled "The Bible and Its Influence," the 392-page book, co-edited by Chuck Stetson and Cullen Schippe, is a product of years of planning, including the Gallup poll of teens' biblical knowledge. (It is listed for $67.75 to individuals and $50 for schools.)

http://www.pewforum.org/news

Complete Story

The bitter if not funny irony is that there are clear divisions btween enemy lines that the majority of the population of the West wander across in a daze, oblivious to them. It's our intention at this blog to clarify the lines and postions between neo-feudalist Left dhimmi fascism and Modernist progressive Humanism.

Stranger than fiction, this politic makes for strange bedfellows, we finding ourselves more often than not waking up with Christians and other religious adherents. To preserve Milton the atheist lays down with the Pope.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Karen Hughes' New Chip for Trip

Breaking News Flashes Like Wine Goblets.

N.D. Times special correspondent, Dag Eyks compiled the following story from the newswire, and we'll have more as it comes:

At least 19 killed in Hamas rally explosion in Gaza

By Amos Harel and Arnon regular, Haaretz Correspondents and News Agencies

[I]n a press conference several hours after the incident, Hamas officials claimed that the rockets displayed during the rally were Karen Hughes Aircraft Co. dummies that did not contain explosives. They also slammed the Palestinian Authority for blaming Hamas for the blasts.

"One of my missions is to go to listen. I hope to listen, to seek to understand, to show respect," Hughes said.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=18834

They went on to present an electronic component which they claimed was found on the body of one of the dead.

"I think this is the beginning, I know that this is the beginning and I hope this is going to be the beginning of many productive conversations," Hughes said.
***

The chip, they claimed, strengthened their claim that Israeli missiles targeted the vehicle.
***

A Doll That Can Recognize Voices, Identify Objects and Show Emotion

By Michel Marriot

New York Times, August 24, 2006


Judy Shackelford, who has been in the toy industry for more than 40 years, has seen a lot of dolls. But none, she says, like her latest creation, a marvel of digital technologies, including speech-recognition and memory chips, radio frequency tags and scanners, and facial robotics. She and her team have christened it Amazing Karen.

http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/news/emotiondoll.htm

In a phone interview with Ms. Hughes, our correspondent asked how things are goin' y'know, like at the White House and stuff.

Ms. Hughes said "My name is Chatty Karen, and I pee on you leg."

Our Path to War

Rx: Sunlight, band-aid, or rest and plenty of fluids?

Should the West co-enable the vast majority of peace-loving moderate Muslims by opening and furthering avenues that allow us to continue dialoguing with peoples of variant and equally valid cultures and traditions, often those peoples being past and even current victims of our cultural if not always military and economic neo-colonialist and imperialist agenda? Should we empower the Other? Should we by benevolent aid try to further the spread of democracy across the Islamic world?

Should we continue our current course of Senstive New-Age warfare in which we selectively target terrorism?

Should we cut our losses and let the Islamic world colapse like a rotten souffle?

Let's for now set aside the options we prefer, those being massive retaliation for any (even) perceived outrage against the interests of the West, i.e. melting Mecca; and the actual strongly preferred colonization of Dar al-Islam by Walkerian Immortals.

We open this post with a quotation from a typical Muslim. Looking at the creature's mind at work we can extrapolate to the billion or so like her, and from that we can see the face of our enemy writ whole: Our wise leaders rightly do not wish to face such a sizable enemy face-to-face in a war conventional, a war on the scale and in terms of the two previous World Wars. Man to man we couldn't kill them fast enough to win or even to keep them from our shore if they decided to swim. Islam, the united ummah is too large a population to fight by conventional means, and we in the West do not want the war they seem intent on provoking. We in the West are determined to avoid even thinking about it. We go out of our ways to argue that it's not happening, that if there's a problem it's of our own making, and that if we're making it happen we should stop it before it gets out of hand. And that's the very few who will take out the ear phones long enough to listen to any argument at all. The vast majority of the West's populations will not even listen to the idea that there is anything at all wrong in our shared world experience. There's no immediate threat to those living in the suburbs on a daily basis, no terrorist threat that engages people personally and immediately, and if there is some violence it's scattered and occasional, not a thing to notice for more than a few days, if that. It's all considered to be blown out of proportion by racist Islamophobic bigots and the problem is with Israel and the invasion of Iraq. It's the old companies. It's the Man on the Moon.

The middle classes in the West do not wish to be disturbed by those they see as alarmists. Religion of peace. Tiny minority. Mumble in sleep. Hijacked by fanatics. Halliburton. Oil companies. The Jews. Kid's soccer game on Thursday....

By IBRAHIM BARZAK

Associated Press Writer

September 24, 2005, 3:40 PM EDT

Farhad's mother, known as Um Nidal, said all three of her sons have been killed in fighting with the Israelis. "I am so proud," she said. "I wish I had more sons to offer."

http://www.newsday.com
***

Those who know the history of war, and more importantly the psychology of war, of warriors in combat, will know that total war is always with us, and that it's only in this past century that total war is eliminated from vast parts of the West. Yeah, Bush is worse than Hitler. America is the most destructive empire in history. White Europeans, as Susan Sontag writes, are the cancer of history. Those who know war know better, and to listen to the Sontags of the "anti-war" movement is to become nauseous and enraged. War, historically, is annihilation of ones armed opponents and the enslavement of their fit survivors, some of them. We in the West do not murder civilian populations at random for the sake of extermination. We do not offer to exterminate our own children for the sake of the greater glory of our tribes. We avoid war like the plague. Modern war is so terrible only because our technology is so advanced. Otherwise it's far less destructive than man on man sword fighting. But here we are in the beginnings of a war we in the West generally refuse to acknowledge as a war at all. What is to be done? Our nations do not want war against the primitive fascist hordes of Islam who wish only that they had more sons to die. We want our continued comfort.

The war waged on civil Modernity is not going to go away. No appeasement is going to sate the death-lust of Muslims. Even Islamic triumph world-wide won't stop the war that will wage within Islam. The author below gives us some variations of possible approaches to our situation. We think they all suck.
***

Viewpoint: Assessing Bush's Iraq logic

Mark N. Katz
United Press International

September 27, 2005

WASHINGTON -- In his speech at the Pentagon on September 22, President Bush repeated his warning against America withdrawing its troops from Iraq. "Our withdrawal from Iraq would allow the terrorists to claim an historic victory over the United States," he said. "It would leave our enemies emboldened and allow men like [Abu Mussab Al] Zarqawi and [Osama] Bin Laden to dominate the Middle East and launch more attacks on America and other free nations."

The problem with this argument, of course, is that the Islamic extremists are already attacking America and its allies, and are citing the American troop presence in Iraq as a reason for doing so. Would the threat that America and its allies face from Islamic extremists be appreciably greater if American troops leave Iraq?

The experience of the Cold War suggests that the president's warning should be taken seriously. The American withdrawal from Indochina at the beginning of 1973 was followed by the Marxist takeover of this entire region in early 1975. Furthermore, Marxist revolutionary regimes came to power in several other Third World countries during the 1970s, including Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique in Africa; Nicaragua and Grenada in the Western Hemisphere; and Afghanistan in Asia. Powerful Marxist insurgencies arose in several other countries (including El Salvador and the Philippines) that lasted well into the 1980s.

Would all this have happened if the United States had not withdrawn its troops from Indochina? It is not possible, of course, to answer this question definitively. There are, though, two observations that can be made about what happened back then that have differing implications for the present. On the one hand, there was harsh authoritarian or colonial rule, along with no opportunity for peaceful democratic change in each of these countries, and so Marxist revolution might well have resulted in some or all of them even if American forces had remained in Indochina.

On the other hand, the strong American domestic opposition to military intervention that rose up as a result of the Vietnam experience undoubtedly did embolden Marxist revolutionaries elsewhere. Success at revolution seemed all the more achievable with the knowledge that the United States was not likely to undertake large-scale intervention in order to stop it. The expectation that the United States would not intervene also encouraged military intervention by established Marxist regimes during this period, as with Cuba aided by the Soviet Union in Angola and the Horn of Africa, Vietnam in Cambodia and the USSR in Afghanistan.

What do these two observations suggest about the present? First, the American military presence in Iraq has clearly not prevented Islamic revolutionary forces from vying for power with the Muslim world's many authoritarian regimes that are unwilling to allow themselves to be voted out of power (many of which are backed by the United States).

The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza gave rise to Islamic revolutionary activity there long before the US-led intervention in Iraq. It would not be surprising, then, if Islamic revolution takes place in countries ripe for it even if American forces remain in Iraq.

The second observation, though, indicates that just as the American withdrawal from Indochina led to an upsurge of Marxist revolutionary activity in the 1970s, an American withdrawal from Iraq will lead to increased Islamic revolutionary activity now. Men like Zarqawi and Bin Laden will indeed see this as an opportunity to dominate the Middle East, as Bush warned. Islamic revolution might well succeed elsewhere after a US withdrawal from Iraq.

There is, however, a third observation about the Cold War that could apply to the present. When the US withdrew from Indochina and Marxist regimes arose in so many Third World countries shortly thereafter, it seemed to many that American power had gone into an irreversible decline and that Marxism was the wave of the future in much of the world, if not all of it.

It was at this moment of seeming triumph for the Marxists, however, that things started to go increasingly wrong for them. The Marxist world was already bitterly divided between the partisans of Moscow and the partisans of China. In addition, virtually all of the new Marxist regimes that came into being in the 1970s proved to be both weak and unpopular. None could deliver prosperity for their citizens. Although their revolutionary ideology claimed to speak on behalf of their entire people, these regimes were often based on - and favored - certain ethnicities, tribes, or regions over others. The less favored groups resisted - and soon found support from external powers, including the United States. Indeed, the United States found during the 1980s that, compared to counterinsurgency, undermining revolutionary regimes was relatively easy since they themselves cooperated in this through their pursuit of misguided or even vicious domestic policies.

What this observation suggests is that if American forces withdraw from Iraq and Islamic revolutionary regimes comes to power there and elsewhere, the seemingly triumphant Islamic revolutionary wave might experience some of the same problems that the Marxist revolutionary one did previously. The Islamic revolutionary movement has already become increasingly divided between Sunnis and Shias. The leading Sunni radical leader in Iraq, Zarqawi, has recently declared war on Shias. In addition, the Islamic revolutionary regimes that have already come into being have already proved that they cannot deliver prosperity for the majority - even when, like Iran, they possess vast oil wealth. It is doubtful that Islamic revolutionary regimes elsewhere would prove any less corrupt than the Iranian one.

Nor is Islamic revolutionary ideology likely to eliminate ethnic, tribal and regional differences within countries. Islamic revolutionaries in Iraq appear determined to exacerbate them. Under these circumstances it is highly likely that, just as in Marxist-ruled states previously, less favored groups in Islamic states would resist the regime and would seek support from external powers, including the United States.

While Bush has argued that withdrawing from Iraq will result in much worse consequences for America than remaining there, the experience of the Cold War suggests that the opposite might actually be true. Although it was not intended as such, the American withdrawal from Indochina proved not so much to be a defeat as it was a strategic retreat that resulted in our Marxist opponents both overextending and discrediting themselves. This allowed the United States to more effectively undermine them than did stubbornly continuing its unsuccessful counterinsurgency efforts in Indochina.

An American withdrawal from Iraq might have a similar impact. Some, of course, would argue that there is no guarantee that this would happen, and that Islamic revolutionaries might seize power in country after country if they think that America would not intervene to stop them. It is highly unlikely, though, that Islamic revolutionaries in power would avoid the many mistakes made by Marxist revolutionaries before them. Indeed, their arrogance and intolerance practically guarantee that they would make them. Bush's stubborn continuation of an unsuccessful counterinsurgency effort in Iraq might only be delaying this process.

Mark N. Katz is a professor of government and politics at George Mason University

http://www.metimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20050927-070730-4591r
***

There's a chance that by letting the world of Islam go to Hell on its own that we won't have to fight them at all. That Cold War thesis, that by fighting Communism we allowed it to live on, ignores the problem of the details of the daily lives of those suffering, in this case, from the evils of Islam. If we allow Islam to take its natural course, to grow as a boil on the collective Human body that it will of its own nature burst, ignores the value of individual Human life.

In a later post we'll look at the International Brigades of the Spanish Civil War. We'll also look at the current situation in Thailand as it comes under attack by Islamic triumphalists. In drawing those two topics together we will put forth our preferred solution to the state of Islamic imperialism today.