# It's all about religion....................



## Kirkhill (1 Dec 2006)

http://www.bigpharaoh.com/

Scroll down through this link and check out the photographs.  Also try and follow the article on Shias, Sunnis and Al Jazeera.

If you can figure that lot out.........

The way that I figure it anytime soon now Al Zawahiri will be declaring his solidarity with the Gemael clan.


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Dec 2006)

It is all about religion from the islamofacist view, we havent quite caught on due to our over pc multicultural society. We fought the cold war which pitted communism vs capitalism/democracy. Now its democracy vs radical islam. The Pope is leading the way in confronting this threat which not only threatens our culture but our religion. Hopefully the clergy of other faiths will wake up to the threat, because if the shepard is asleep so is his flock.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Dec 2006)

It may be all about religion as far as the islamo-fascists are concerned (to give a name to our enemies).  But their target market is concerned about issues other than religion.  If that is the case and the enemy can see only one issue, or in fact only have one issue that they can exploit then that leaves an awful lot of of other faultlines for us to exploit.  

Lanchester strategy (developed by the same chap that developed the Lanchester sub-machine gun for the Royal Navy) was used by the Japanese company Canon to introduce their photo-copier to the UK market which was dominated by Xerox.  Most of the business was based in London and Xerox focused its efforts there.  It had that market sewn up.  But because of focusing its efforts in the Capital the provinces (as usual) were poorly served.   Canon went after the provinces, starting in Glasgow.  The Glaswegians were flattered to receive the attention and service (after all its not everybody that can put up with them) and Canon proved their product and their service.  They encroached on Xerox's market and ultimately displaced them even in the London market, becoming the dominant Copier in the UK.

Its a fancy way of attacking away from strength combined with the inkblot strategy.  Muslims aren't our enemy although our enemy proclaim themselves muslims.  We also have Christian and atheist enemies and enemies who are just plain thugs.  It doesn't help us to push 1 - 1.5 billion people into a mass, declare them to be the enemy, then try to move the whole mob in the direction we would like to see them move.  

 That would be like trying to move a herd of sheep or cattle. The inertia of  mass prevents the mob going in any direction other than that which they choose.  If you continue to apply pressure to the whole mob then you end up with an uncontrollable stampede that may or may not go where you want, may or may not flatten you in the process but will likely result in a bunch of blown and dead animals.  The usual way to work a herd is a combination of directing the leaders, gentle pressure to the perimeter and cutting out manageable chunks that are more easily directed.

If religion IS the only thing that the Islamo-fascists can find to offer then I don't think that ultimately goes very far with Abdul 6-Pack that isn't particularly observant and just wants to make a life for his wife and kids.


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Dec 2006)

The Imam's dont have any problem selling jihad to the youth of the muslim world. They use history and what they perceive to be our decadent life style against us.Their goal is to recreate their heyday when the muslims conquered much of the known world. I can see a time when Europe is so threatened by their muslim communities that they are expelled from Europe. Right now the French are fighting an intifadah in their cities. At some point the French voter will turn to a leader that can deal with the problem. As they are unlikely to transform their socialist state they will force the muslims to leave France.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Dec 2006)

I don't doubt that T6.  The Banlieues are the Mullahs' own Inkblots - attacking away from strength.  How best to counter that attack?  Meeting engagement - direct confrontation in the Banlieues?  Depth engagement - working against Command (widely distributed nodes but still a physical target) and Support (primarily financial that is best targeted by Racketeering type counters)?  Or domination of "No man's land" - Mao's sea - the uncommitted target market?  

We seem to be engaging in the Depth battle with varying success.  The meeting engagement is being pursued by some forces in some places with varying success. "No Man's Land" is largely dominated by the enemy.

In short, our problems are a result of an uncoordinated strategy resulting from an imperfect view of the battlefield.  We are hindered by a lack of overall commitment to the battle both domestically and internationally and further complicated by media who by and large don't like seeing people die (although editors and the marketing department may be of a different mindset to reporters) and honestly believe that there needs to be a "right" answer to justify defending yourself.

Further to the "No Man's Land" metaphor. In World War I "No Man's Land" was dominated by offensive patrols at night.  Canadian activity kept the German activity low.  The media these days are acting as well meaning idiots who, if they had been around in World War I, would have demanded the right to send up parachute flares so that they could watch the patrols at work.


----------



## Cardstonkid (1 Dec 2006)

For a little perspective I thought I’d ad this bit.

Through the age of Religious Wars in Europe there was a period of more than 200 years where Protestants of various stripes and “The Church” fought over the control of the lives of Europeans. When one studies this period it becomes obvious that the wars were not about religion, rather about power. Religion was simply the vehicle by which the political elites could rally their people around their cause. If a Prussian prince wanted power he joined a Protestant movement that displaced the loyalty to Rome and put it solely on himself and his nation. 

The real points of the struggle were centered on issues of power. The masses of the uneducated and illiterate were mobilized by the faith that they subscribed to. For many loyalty to the State (which meant their people, their family) was paramount and the Christian ideals that they held reinforced the value they put on their national identity. This gave them a unifying bond which gave them a sense of being and importance. This was a real source of power for those that could mobilize it. 

The Age of Religious Wars in Europe was interconnected with the Agricultural Revolution. This period of massive change which included a move of the populace from the country to the city combined with an overall explosion of the European population due to increased food production and the breakdown of conservative community life created great social upheaval. As is common in such turbulent times, people turned to “fundamentalist” Christian movements. These movements preached a message of continuity and security in an age of uncertainty and change.

Now contrast the European experience with that of the Middle-East and the rest of the developing world. These developing regions are transitioning from traditional cultures with Iron Age technology to modern industrial nation states. Unlike the European example this transition is occurring in some places within one generation! For example, a Bedouin child born in Saudi Arabia in 1950 would have been born in a world of camels and tents. The height of technology would have been a Lee-Enfield rifle if they were lucky enough to own one. Most would still have firearms of far older vintage. Yet within 20 years these same Bedouins would be driving Mercedes-Benz automobiles and resting in luxury suites watching colour television. If they chose to ride camels or sleep in a tent all the supplies for their outing would be brought out in Land-Rovers. 

Is there any wonder that in this period of massive change that many seek a return to a perceived “golden age”, where life was slower, sensible, and easier to understand? It is also easy to see how times of great social upheaval give rise to radical leaders that ride the wave of religious fundamentalism to ultimate power over those looking for security in an unsafe world.

The patterns we observe with Fundamentalist Islam have occurred before. On the surface it appears that it is all a matter of religion, but the truth is far more subtle. Religion is not the cause; it is the symptom of larger more complex issues.  

In Europe the issues revolving around religion, social upheaval, technological change all worked themselves out but at a horribly high price.  After a couple of centuries of bloody warfare the European states formed relatively rigid national borders with their own sponsored religions. These nations became more concerned with their own national interests rather than with issues of theology. Of course the emergence of nationalism led to origins of WWI, but that is another story.

While history is not a prophetic science it does sound cautionary alarms over the current situation in the world. Fundamentalist Islam (and Christianity for that matter) is a response to great social upheaval. Islamic nations are often artificial states, vestiges of the Colonial era, how they hold together and react to this transition period is and will be a great challenge. There may be many terrible wars to be fought between the differing schools of Islam as they battle for control over the Muslim masses. New borders will be drawn and identities created. The most terrifying prospect is that these wars will be fought with 21st Century weapons. 

So what do we do with a foe that does not know itself, is in the throws of social and cultural change and is united only by its ignorance of the outside world? The answer is we fight. We fight those that will use violence to impose their will on others. We fight their ignorance by building schools and letting them see the outside world. We fight intolerance by showing them how and why tolerance is not just nice, but necessary. We fight for their security and their ability to be secure by their own hand. Ultimately we win the fight by living the ideals we preach. 

It may well be that our civilization is on a decline and that we no longer really believe the things we preach. We may be too dazzled by our own prosperity to care about the future, even if it is our future. History has lessons on this topic as well, but again that is another story.


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Dec 2006)

Great post Cardstonkid. Its all about power but to acheive that the effort is wrapped in the mantle of religion,a vehicle to acheive that power if you will. We dont have a problem engaging them on the battlefield but the other battlefield that we are losing is the PR battle. It doesnt help that much of the media seems to support the terrorist cause. Recently it was discovered that AP was making up sources and was essentially reporting terrorist propaganda. The alleged burning of 6 Sunni's didnt happen at all is one recent example. The media attacks anyone who opposes the islamists as prejudiced, racist and bigoted. I for one has no problem with muslims practicing their faith, as long as they dont try to tell me how to live or try to replace our laws for their own religious laws. If an immigrant is trying to make a go in a new land I say bravo. It must be remembered that they must adopt to the laws and culture of their new country. They have done this in the US but havent been able to assimilate into European society. For that reason I see Europe as the away game of the islamic radicals.


----------



## rmacqueen (3 Dec 2006)

First off, in viewing those photos I have to wonder how the girl in the top photo, the one with the low cut jeans, would feel being under fundamentalist rule.

Unfortunately, we tend to view the whole thing in a religious context but that is the simplistic view that just muddies the truth.  There are a number of prominent groups that wrap themselves in the cloak of Islam and have very little to do with faith and more to do with power.  It is no different than viewing the Northern Ireland "troubles" as nothing more than sectarian violence when the underlying reasons were much more than that.

T6, you are also buying into what the media is presenting.  There are many Imam who are preaching against this sort of thing but they tend not to get the press that hatemongers do.  The tendency is to paint all Muslims with the same brush but at the same time you have to ask yourself if the Muslims who immigrated to the west to escape that sort of life would be willing to have it come here?  My belief is the answer would be no.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the various factions within the religion itself have not run into each other yet.  In Lebanon, for instance, we saw a joining of the Sunni's and the Christians because of Sunni opposition to Hezbollah, which is predominately Shiite.  It is like saying that what the Catholic church does represents what every western caucasion thinks.  Or saying that National Socialist represented what every right wing party wanted.

IMO, religion is the convenient label but not the underlying cause and as the situation grows we will see an eventual implosion within these groups.


----------



## tomahawk6 (3 Dec 2006)

There is a difference between muslims and islamists [jihadists]. I dont have a problem with the former just the latter. When the local muslim community decides they dont like our laws and want to be exempt from their application we are on the slippery slope toward the tyranny of the minority. This is where multiculturalism is a threat to the cohesiveness of society. Canada for example has both an English and French heritage. To get along both languages are the official language. The cost of printing documents in two languages is twice as expensive. Both languages are taught in school [not a bad thing]. French speakers which are a minority in effect have forced english speaking Canada to adopt some of their culture. Now throw in a muslim minority that might want to wear burqa's and have sharia law instead of Canadian law. They might use Canadian law to sue those that oppose their viewpoint. The media is quick to accuse people of being bigots for expressing their opinion. Once the minority is able to shut their opposition up then they will increasingly erode the rights of the majority. We then have the tyranny of the minority.

I see this being practiced in the US, not by muslims but by the multiculturalists. They attack public displays of christianity. Its ok for muslims or jews to exhibit their faith but not by christians - the US is 80% christian.
They dont want the borders to be secured, they feel that the US should not have borders ! Its bigotry to resolve the illegal immigrant issue despite their cost to the economy and the taxpayer. The boy scouts are bad for not allowing gay scoutmasters. Its a slow steady erosion of the core values of the country. In the UK they are about to allow sharia law for their muslim citizens. One law for British citizens and a seperate one for muslims. Is that fair to the majority ? In the case of rape a man would get jail time but in a sharia court he would walk. There are laws protecting women but in sharia law women have very few rights. At some point there would be a backlash by the majority of citizens, unless they are too cowed to resist the erosion of their own rights.

Everyone needs to educate themselves about the religion of islam and how its actually practised. Right now the religion is being driven by activists and jihadists. We have to worry about the one's abroad and the one's at home that are undermining the laws and rules of our society.


----------



## Dare (3 Dec 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> http://www.bigpharaoh.com/
> 
> Scroll down through this link and check out the photographs.  Also try and follow the article on Shias, Sunnis and Al Jazeera.
> 
> ...


Both anarchy and social liberalism, are in my opinion, often the battleground between competing religious ideologies. They can be used as a sword point into the underbelly of a nation. The problem is, those along those edges tend to be easily swayed from one side to the other. It is quite visible when you see feminists and/or communists marching along side Islamic fundamentalists in protest marches. Alliances of convenience. They have turned our ideological (hearts and minds) line back quite a bit with successful propaganda. It won't be as difficult to win them back as it would be the terrorists turning them, but it will be much more of a challenge now. Once burned twice shy. It always saddens me to know that reasonable people are either apathetic or making unreasonable narrow focused choices. Hopefully, one day, there can be a clarity of values and consistency in our policy, so that we can stop losing ground on this *very very* important front.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 Dec 2006)

Here is a bit more fuel for the fire, from _Forbes_, reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act:

http://www.forbes.com/business/healthcare/feeds/ap/2006/12/06/ap3232781.html 


> Somalia Official Issues Beheading Threat
> 
> By MOHAMED SHEIKH NOR 12.06.06, 10:52 AM ET
> 
> ...



We are not at war with Islam, we are at war with groups, _movements_ is my preferred term, which want to take both Islam and societies in the _Muslim Crescent_ (stretching from Morocco, across North Africa, through the Middle East and Central Asia, all the way to Indonesia) back to medieval Arabian social and cultural mores.

Bear in mind that about 1.5 billion people live in that _crescent_ and they have a high birth rate.


----------

