View from India: Wake Up Call

by Parvathi

It was unexpected - the killing of Osama - in the sense, we were not aware of how hot the pursuit must have been. It was said to have taken place without anyone knowing. That's hard to believe. Either way, Pakistan is absolutely miserable about its public image - America's favorite, not being told about the operation that took place just a few miles from its capital. Or worse, did Pakistan trade Osama for Afghanistan?

Strangely enough, Osama bin Laden no longer had what it takes to evoke any great emotion. In the ten years after 9/11, Al Qaeda has morphed and metastasized into a movement in which Osama appeared no longer to be central. It had become an ideology - a social movement, some say - that can no longer be easily wiped out. Who knows, maybe Osama hiding in Pakistan hated his miserable life - whatever. The most suspicious thing to me about the whole operation were the repeated reports by the press about Osama's burial at sea, complete with proper Islamic rites. Burial at sea when he was killed on land? Islamic rites - really?

Someone seems to have slipped up on their homework. Was it even Osama who was killed? Or was it all staged to boost President Obama's sagging public image? He now goes down in history as the man who avenged the carnage of 9/11. What about Osama's image as a martyr to the cause? What about the backlash for not giving him a proper Islamic burial (facing Mecca)? Who knows? Time will tell. My commitment to politics reaches only as far as the armchair remote; I see only generalities.

But the Islamic faith is an unique one. For one thing, it speaks of an abstract God who is beauty and truth. There is no image to focus on and pray to. Islam also recognizes that all men and women are equal: the beginnings of Socialism perhaps?

I had a wonderful experience of staying with a Hyderabadi Muslim family, years back, when I was in college. The men and women ate separately sitting round a low table. What fascinated me was this: their servants also ate with them - something I had never seen anywhere else before. These people were very rich upper class traders, but at the table all were one. I saw this again while watching a Bergman movie about the 19th century Swedish middle/upper-middle class. Of course here the men and women were not segregated as in the Muslim household. Neither way seemed particularly unnatural. It has always stayed with me, this wonderful feeling of community that came across.

This morning while walking on the beach I saw a beach party in progress. A big group of young people were celebrating someone's birthday with cake and candles. They were busy cutting pieces of cake, serving each other, drinking fizzy soda pops and all the rest of it. Standing at the fringe of it all and watching avidly were two beach urchins. The smaller one was asking his big brother questions: what are they eating? why the candles? how does a cake taste?

A man stood watching the two kids. He had a prayer cap and sported the traditional Muslim beard. He walked up to the group said something to them. The young people cut a couple of pieces and the man went up to the boys with the pieces of cake. The older one said he did not like cake, but the younger one just grabbed his and ate it with gusto. He looked positively ecstatic. The older one then reluctantly took the other piece. They thanked the man with the prayer cap. He said, "Allah is just, beautiful, and true." and walked away. The beach urchins turned and went their own way.

I never thought of telling the group to share their cake with the two kids.

-- from Parvathi's blog FINE LINE; reprinted by permission.

Why Not Again?

There is a house in Thiruvanmaiyur along the beach road where I usually take my morning constitutional – a big house of indeterminate color, with all kinds of frills, picture windows and Rapunzel towers; one, that stands out and would catch the eye of sidewalk artists and movie audiences – that seems mostly abandoned. The yard is choked with weeds and refuse; neighbors heaving their trash over the wall. It is said to be used occasionally for photo shoots for some of the oodles of movies the highly successful Tamil film industry cranks out on a daily basis.

One time I was out there early morning, watching the fishermen unloading their catches and I noticed a helicopter hovering over that particular place. I didn’t think too much about it at the time; but lately, I’ve been thinking that it could also very well function as India’s version of our witness protection program or as a safe house for Tamil Tiger plotters. Hide in plain sight. Why not make the lie so big, so obvious, that no one will question it?

Mockery is one of the most potent weapons in the human arsenal. It has always been so. Christ on the cross was said to have been mocked. Obviously, Bush was mocked constantly. Since Obama’s election, mockery has been pretty much off the table as the president has shown himself to be far more adept in the art (of mockery) than any of his critics.

Besides, it’s in bad form to mock a black man. One might be accused of racism. Though, this too might be dependent on other factors as we are discovering that black or white may not be the issue at all. Justice Thomas, for instance, might be mocked and no one will say much about it. It’s only Obama that cannot be mocked. What’s the difference? Both men – last time I looked – are black. Here we come to the nub or it: only certain black men can be mocked while others can’t. The modifier that explains all this appears to be ‘conservative’.

Note how liberals strut around, routinely mocking tea parties, Republican lawmakers and presidents, popular talk show hosts and commentators, second amendment supporters, presidential aspirants, religious leaders and their congregations, etc. Make no mistake, these are attacks and they do damage.

You might say that Limbaugh (and some others) mocks the Left. The difference is that Limbaugh gives reasons for his mockery. The Left gives no reasons. Ordinarily, the press would step in to mediate. But, we all know that the media tilts the playing field to favor the Left. Limbaugh’s words and audience are routinely treated as if they do not exist. Instead, people like the girls on ‘The View’ are given star headline treatment.

The day after Osama’s killing, Limbaugh went on air and mocked Obama. There it was! The Left was outraged (if they said anything). What was supposed to be America’s proudest moment since the start of the war on terror, was being mocked unabashedly. Other talk show hosts, known for being critical of the president, refrained from doing so. Not Limbaugh!

Maybe it’s just me, but I too found the whole deal somewhat hollow. For me personally, it did not seem to rise to the status of a significant event. And any attempt to see it as such seemed somehow contrived and cheap, and quite worthy of mockery – an ‘emperor has no clothes’ moment, if you wish. A proper trial would have sat well and settled it. The subtext is, of course, that we can no longer expect a proper trial in this country. Obama has taken that from us as well.

It should have been a moment of quiet restraint and reflection. It needed to be handled with much greater fineness than simply dumping a corpse into the drink. Mike had it right, I think: ‘Defeat snatched out of the jaws of victory’, he wrote. Neither does it impress that al-Qaeda confirmed the kill publicly. I seem to remember AQ websites being largely supportive of Obama winning the election in 2008. They got their wish. Why not again?

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

View from India: DEATH OF A JIHADI FRANKENSTEIN’S MONSTER

by B.RAMAN

(Written at the request of the Editor of the “Economic Times”, New Delhi)

Osama bin Laden (OBL), the head of Al Qaeda, was killed by the U.S. Special Forces during a past midnight chopper-borne raid on his hide-out at Abbotabad, a garrison town, about 100 kms from Islamabad, on May 1. He influenced thousands of young Muslims, who grew to adulthood in the 1980s and the 1990s, to take to jihadi terrorism as a weapon of defiance. He wanted them to use this weapon to correct what he looked upon as the historic injustices done to the Ummah by the non-Islamic world.

Among such instances of historic injustices to the Muslims, he cited the Jewish occupation of Palestine and the occupation of lands, which, according to him, had historically belonged to the Muslims by non-Islamic forces. He also wanted the Muslims to take to arms against ideological influences that tended to corrupt Islam.

He initially fought against the corrupting influence of the Marxist ideology in Afghanistan against the Soviet and Afghan troops in the 1980s. He saw nothing wrong in accepting the assistance of Western ideological forces for countering Marxism and to force it to quit Afghanistan.

He might not have acquired the iconic image which he developed subsequently but for the use of him by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIAS) and the agencies of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia which projected him as a jihadi fighter par excellence in order to use him for mobilising Muslim youth of the Arab world for the jihad against the Soviet troops and the Marxist ideology.

With the assistance of these agencies, he forced the Soviet troops to withdraw from Afghanistan and helped to bring Afghanistan under the control of medieval Islamic forces in the form of the Taliban. His medieval version of Islam, which is condemned today by the U.S., was encouraged by the U.S. in the 1980s to use it as a strategic weapon against Marxism .

Having tasted success in Afghanistan, he and his force of Arab youth, trained and armed with the help of these agencies in secret camps in Pakistan turned against their Western benefactors and mentors and transformed their jihad against Marxism into a new jihad against the Crusaders and the Jewish people in the 1990s. The icon of the 1980s, toasted by the U.S. because of his success against the Marxists, became the dreaded Frankenstein’s monster of the 1990s and thereafter.

This jihadi Frankenstein’s monster, jointly created by the agencies of the U.S., Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, became the world’s most dreaded terrorist who spread death and destruction across the world through his Al Qaeda and International Islamic Front (IIC) starting from 1996. The 9/11 terrorist strikes in the U.S. Homeland made the U.S. realize that the reach of this monster of its own creation had extended up to the U.S.

The slaying of this monster became the driving force of the so-called war against international terrorism. It has taken nearly 10 years and an expenditure of billions of dollars to slay this monster. At the end, the death of this monster came at the place where it was born, namely, in Pakistan. After 10 years of search the monster was traced .

The monster was found hiding in the place where the Pakistan Army was born and where its new officer-recruits are trained every year. Abbotabad is the cradle of the Pakistan Army and in that cradle was found the monster. There were indicators of a cosy relationahip between the monster and one of its original creators----the Pakistani Army and intelligence.

The death of the jihadi Frankenstein’s monster in the cradle of the Pakistan Army has thrown the spotlight even more intensely than till now on another Frankenstein’s monster --- namely, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan.

Since the 1980s, the ISI was was pampered, fed and fattened by the U.S. along with the Pakistan Army. The U.S., which closed its eyes to the pernicious role played by this State Frankenstein’s monster in sponsoring terrorism of various kinds against India, Afghanistan and other countries, is confused and does not know how to act against this State Frankenstein’s monster after having killed the non-State monster.

The end of OBL will not be the end of international jihadi terrorism. The non-state head of international jihadi terrorism may be dead, but the State of Pakistan, which continues to use this terrorism, lives in a denial mode. Neither the State of Pakistan nor its civil society is prepared to admit that Al Qaeda and its surviving leaders have managed to escape arrest, prosecution or death so far, because of the support extended to them by the State of Pakistan. The same is the case with the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and other jihadi affiliates of Al Qaeda.

Unless the U.S. and other members of the international community are prepared to draw the right lessons from the discovery that OBL had been living and surviving in an important garrison town of Pakistan and force the State of Pakistan to stop using terrorism as a weapon of the State, OBL’s death may not mark the beginning of the end of international jihadi terrorism.

OBL may be dead but jihadi terrorism in some form or the other will survive so long as it enjoys the support of the State of Pakistan.( 3-5-2011)

(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India)

Barack Hussein Obama: The American President

Peter Koelliker replied to comment from NJ to IL | May 3, 2011 10:12 AM | Reply

Spengler is awesome. I’m glad you discovered him. He goes by a pseudonym and nobody really knows who he is. He is deep and keenly aware of what’s going on. He has Obama figured out to down to the patterns of his crib blanket.
-------------------------------------------------------
All is forgiven. Obama has redeemed himself. In one masterful stroke he has managed to turn a failed presidency into a great success – this according to major media reports this morning. Were elections held today, Obama would win handily over any (Republican) opponent. It was he, after all, who succeeded in slaying America’s most recognizable enemy and killer of nearly 3000 innocents back on 9/11/01.

Osama has been crowing about it ever since, taking credit and chipping away at America’s confidence. Quite beside the point is the fact that bin Laden was never the architect or inspiration of al-Qaeda; that al-Qaeda was always a burgeoning movement that chose to adopt bin Laden’s human face in order to present itself to the world.

There are now millions of other names and faces associated with al-Qaeda just as there are now also a multitude of faces competing to represent America. Al-Qaeda is really only an abstraction, quite like the idea of ‘America’ is an abstraction. The president of a country enjoys an enormous advantage over all others insofar as he has been proclaimed ‘leader’ by whatever means that nation decides to conduct its leadership lottery – this, quite apart from any particular ideology.

That much is true for any street gang or family. Someone always comes to the fore to assume responsibility for maintaining the clan’s security and giving voice to its ambitions. Seldom – though it has happened – does a leader actively champion the clan’s demise.

Ascension to leadership usually involves a killing – either virtual or direct – some demonstration of power and the willingness to use it. Bin Laden certainly fit the bill on that account. What he managed to do was audacious and unexpected. It rocked the most powerful nation back on its heels. We never quite recovered and remained on the defensive. Now, Obama took it right back to them by this (alleged) high profile killing that cannot go unnoticed. It means that al-Qaeda has weakened just enough to let it happen.

The truth is that al-Qaeda has changed. It is no longer a fledgling, narrow Islamic-based, anti-colonialist movement. It has grown into a global force with many powerful allies. Bin Laden’s brand was no longer adequate to encompass its expanded mission statement that now involves nations and a wholesale shift away from capitalism. Bin Laden had become old hat, passé. He was expendable.

The new face is Barack Hussein Obama’s. He has shed his timidity and shown that he now means business. And we applaud the resurgence of (the new) America.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Kaddafi Blames bin Laden

Three days ago, JANA (Libya’s official news agency), blamed Israel for the unrest. It didn’t convince anyone (or at least not enough) to unite the country. Now, the blame shifts to bin Laden, self-declared - raised to the status of mythical arch - enemy of the West. Kaddafi is grasping at straws. In some part of what's left of his mind he remembers how the West is in the process of destroying itself with the notion that ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’.

Not everything Kaddafi says is mad. In fact, when viewed objectively, he makes several good points - and all, seemingly without the help of a teleprompter. No one can doubt that at least some of what he says about AQ is true. No one can doubt that, to some extent, children have been deliberately wrested from their parents’ beliefs and control. Hell, it’s happening in our own country; schools teaching kids a lot of BS that their parents would never openly approve of! Parents, in both subtle and overt ways, are routinely accused by their kids of committing crimes against the planet; against humanity. It’s well documented that parents often find themselves on the defensive. As such, many have taken a back seat in hopes of avoiding arguments with their eco-fascistic offspring whom they are condemned to love.

With Kaddafi it’s not so complicated. I don’t know to what extent bin Laden is involved in the Libyan turmoil (if at all). He mentions bin Laden merely for the effect it might have in the West. Will the West mobilize to save him under the notion that ‘the enemy of my enemy…”? Probably not. Still, it was worth a try; and it does prove that he’s still out there punching, and not folding like a cheap camera - like Mubarak did.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Midterm Elections Tomorrow

It’s the day before… the wedding; graduation; Christmas. The anticipation is almost unbearable. But, pardon my saying so, this year it seems a little sad. Even after Christmas the winter continues. And some of the kids have been allowed to open their presents already (early voting). And some of the kids who deserved coal in their stockings will be getting presents anyway. And some of the kids who’ve been fighting oversees, won’t get anything at all. And some of Santa’s sleighs got blown up by AQ package bombs, and there’ll be less to go around.

And it hasn’t even snowed yet, which means that old Santa won’t even bother to show up personally; that he’ll be sending that creepy guy with the swords instead. And we all know what that means: it means we’ll be counting our fingers and toes on the day following.

Rumors

Any truth to the rumor that all that was found in the packages were photographs of something that was labeled: ‘BOMB‘? (Said photographs were then published on the front pages of newspapers around the Western world.) Probably not.

But, it would quite suffice to scare the b’Jesus out of everyone and send us scrambling into the relative safety of POTUS’ embrace. Timing remains suspect. So close to elections. October surprise? POTUS looking manly behind his teleprompters. Rally in support of POTUS on the National Mall. POTUS traveling around the world right after. Dollar down.

U.S. midterm elections: hardly a speed bump; POTUS unfazed - continues to bow and scrape for the sins of the nation he has been elected to lead.

AQ has succeeded in reducing jihad down to the level where everyone can participate. Everyone is capable of mailing a postcard. Now, let’s kick it up a notch: Israel, Pakistan, North Korea (and soon Iran) are all said to have nukes. Do they also have Photoshop?

Watch the speech Obama will be giving in Indonesia. I wonder if he’ll be using PowerPoint.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Union Jack over Yorktown

Let’s cut to the chase. Islam, as it exists today, is a ‘religion’ (sic) that seeks to either convert or kill infidels. I am unaware of any significant faction of Islam that has come out and set itself in opposition to this. Admittedly, there are some individuals who have publicly stated that they repudiate this policy, but they are then immediately forced into hiding or condemned to languish in some sort of (U.S.) government-sponsored protection program.

As such, strictly speaking, Islam is not a religion but a ruthless mercenary movement that is often exploited by secular enemies to inflict pain on one another. This is where Islam derives its funding and power. If communism should succeed in bringing down the Free World with the help of Islamist extremists, Islam would find itself crushed within the span of less than a decade. Most Islamists are not smart enough to know that they are merely the pawns in a much larger fight for world supremacy.

In India, as soon as a Christian church is built somewhere, within days a mosque springs up within earshot. Often noisy open-air celebration are quickly organized to intrude on Christian high holy day celebrations. The police is brought in to keep things from getting out of hand. Hindu Temples are now closed to non-Hindus because it has been noted that Muslim visitors tend to make a nuisance of themselves. In order to keep from pointing a finger at the troublemakers, any non-Hindu is now prohibited from entering most sacred Hindu shrines.

Islam is not tolerant of other religions. It does not seek to coexist peacefully. In fact, Muslims who renounce Islam are under threat of death.

It is a fact that AQ conducts its terror all over the world under the banner or Islam. Again, no faction of Islam has come forward to denounce AQ’s repeated atrocities in its name.

Islam cannot win militarily. It seeks to achieve its aims through propaganda, terror and threat. In it’s dealings with non-Islamic states, it is permitted - even encouraged - to lie to secure its advantage. Therefore, any agreement with Islamists - signed or secured with a handshake - is not worth spit.

Lastly, all manner of myths have sprung up surrounding the 9/11 attacks on New York’s World trade Center. One is that Bush personally had a hand in it. Shrug. Another is that no Jews died because they were alerted to what was about to happen. Shrug. Let me suggest a third: Nadler mentions that Muslims also died in the attacks. This is not difficult to accept. Islamists, after all, show little regard for their own anywhere in the world. It is a fact that many more Muslims have died since AQ’s reign of terror than non-Muslims. Nadler may also be technically correct because the hijackers also died on 9/11. However, I have heard of no Muslim innocent dying as a result of the 9/11 outrage. A cursory scan of the internet does not lend credibility to the assertion that innocent Muslims died. If any had, I’m sure their families would have been repeatedly trotted out in front of the TV cameras.

I don’t see how the Carmelite Nuns example figures into the argument. What I do see is akin to the Union Jack being raised over Yorktown to presage the war‘s end in favor of the enemy.