The Right Way to Fight Islam and its Terrorism

FIGHTING TERRORISM: LEARNING FROM HISTORY

Russia has shown that in fighting terrorists courage and decisive action are more effective than subtlety and subterfuge. History also tells the same thing. The following is an article by an Indian author.

There is also talk about the Russians wrapping up the remains of the dead terrorist chechens in pigskin. Note that the main aim of these islamic scum is to embrace martyrdom, while killing as many innocents as possible in the service of their allah. They are guaranteed 72 virgins by none other than Mohammad, who himself even raped a 9-yrd old girl, because he claimed Allah told him to. The wrapping in the pigskin, is to let these Islamic scum know that thats' where they are going to end up when dead, not in the arms of 72 muslims virgins.


N.S. Rajaram


Two major developments in the month of October have served to
highlight the contrast between the direct and the indirect approach to fighting terrorism. By freeing the hostages seized by the Chechyn militants with the help of special forces, the Russian President Vladimir Putin not only ended the siege of the Moscow theatre, but more importantly, sent a clear message to future terrorists that he is not afraid to take firm actionand face the consequences. There were of course casualties, but there would have been even more casualties in the long run if Mr. Putin had chosen concede the terrorist demand. For surely, as the Indian experience in Kashmir has shown, that would not be the end of
terrorism but only the beginning of a new chain of terrorist acts and demands. But now, thanks to Mr. Putin's bold action, the terrorists at the very least will have to rethink their strategy and plans.

It is sobering to contrast this with the US approach to fighting terrorism since it declared war on terrorism a year ago. Mr Bush no doubt mmade a promising beginning, with the ringing proclamation "Those who are not on our side are on the side of the terrorists. Countries harbouring terrorists will be treated as terrorists." But this was soon compromised by a policy of using Pakistan and its military dictator Pervez Musharraf as the
'frontline ally' in the war against the Taliban and al Qaeda in
Afghanistan, overlooking the fact that they were substantially the creation of Pakistan, especially the Interservices Intelligence Agency (ISI). At the height of the war in Afghanistan, the US allowed Pakistan to evacuate hundreds of its men and officers serving with the Taliban and al Qaeda by airlifting them out of the besieged fortress of Kunduz. This policy of hunting with the hounds and running with the hare gave rise to the derisive comment that the United States was fighting the 'bad terrorists' of Taliban and al Qaeda with the help of the 'good terrorists' of Musharraf's Pakistan. It is worth noting that both Indonesia and Russia have charged that the terrorists who killed the tourists in Bali and the hostage takers in the Moscow theatre were trained in al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. The Russian Government has
long maintained that the ISI had a hand in the training of Chechyn
rebels.

None of this seems to have made the US re-examine its policy of
depending on Pakistan to defeat terrorism. When the European Union criticised the recent elections in Pakistan, the United States came to General Musharraf's defence, praising the election as an "important milestone in the march towards democracy." Even the recent revelation, that Pakistan supplied nuclear materials and technology to North Korea in exchange for missiles has failed to evoke any response from the United States. This though should be cause for serious concern: if Pakistan could trade nuclear technology for missiles, it can surely do the same for oil and money with militant Islamic groups. (This could explain why its economy has not collapsed despite dire predictions.) The most
tangible result of the US appeasement of Pakistan has been the
legitimisation of fundamentalist forces, including remnants of Taliban and al Qaeda in the recent electionsin Pakistan. Some Pakistani observers, notably Mr. Ahmad Rashid believe that General Musharraf rigged the elections so that the Jihadi elements fighting under the banner of the MMA would have a
major presence in the National Assembly. In other words, the main result of the US policy of making General Musharraf the frontline ally in its war against terrorism has been to turn the 'bad terrorists' of Taliban and al Qaeda into 'good terrorists' of Musharraf's Pakistan. In the resulting murky scene, it is difficult
to see who is fighting whom in this war against terrorism.


Terrorism in history
History also tells us that terrorism cannot be appeased. Terrorism, by which we mean the threat and use of violence against unarmed persons, has a long tradition in Islam going back to Prophet Muhammad himself. The Hadits (compilation of the acts of the Prophet) record that the Prophet had the poetess Asma bint Marawan assassinated while sleeping with her child. Her crime was satirizing the Prophet and his claims in some of her verses.

The most famous of the Islamic terrorist organizations was the
Nizari Ismailiyun, a Shiite politico-religious sect, founded in 1094
byHasan-e Sabah. He and his followers captured the hill fortress of Almaut in northern Iran, which became their base of operations. Hasan styled himself Grand Master and went on to set up a network of terrorist strongholds in Iran and Iraq. He had trained assassins, most of who according to Marco Polo
were drug addicts. Again according to Marco Polo, young boys
captured by the Grand Master were turned into addicts by giving them progressively larger doses of the drug hashish. This way they were totally dependent on him and would do anything in return for hashish. They came to be known as hashishin, from which we get the word 'assassin.' So the deadly mix of terror and drugs is hardly new.

Hasan-e Sabah and his successor Grand Masters commanded an army of assassins who spread terror among the people and rulers throughout Iran and Iraq. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, The Grand Master had "a corps of devoted terrorists, and an unknown number of agents in enemy camps and cities, who claimed many victims among the generals and statesmen of the Abbasid caliphate as well as several caliphs."

The Nizari Ismaliyun or the Order of the Assassins expanded into
Syria after its founder's death. In the 12th century, Rashid ad-Din as-Sinan, famous as the 'Old Man of the Mountain,' set himself up as an independent Grand Master of the Assassin Order in the impregnable castle of Masyaf in Syria. For more than a century and half, from 1094 to 1256, these Grandmasters and their
assassins spread terror throughout the Middle East. Their end came at the hands of the Mongol warriors of Haleku Khan- the grandson of Chengis Khan. He captured and destroyed the assassin strongholds in Iran one by one, and finally Almaut itself fell in 1256. He mercilessly killed every one of the assassin agents and their leaders. The Syrian castles and strongholds were gradually reduced by Baybars I, the Mamluk Sultan of Egypt.

In more recent times, terror was used to gain political ends by
the late Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan. In 1946, his call for 'Direct Action' in support of his demand for Pakistan led to street riots all across North India. Following this, especially the riots in Calcutta known as the 'Calcutta Killings,' the Congress capitulated and agreed to the Partition of India.

In all this, there is an almost religious belief that terrorism
is both legitimate and effective in gaining political goals. This
belief finds its clearest expression in the Pakistani official manual, The Quranic Concept of War, written by Brigadier Malik under the sponsorship of the late President General Zia ul Haq. In a key passage, Brigadier Malik asserts:

"Terror struck into the hearts of the enemy is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponent's heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved... Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose upon him." As authority Brigadier Malik quotes the Koran (Anfal 59-60): "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the enemies of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know."



No hair-splitting

This belief in the power of domination through terror, and its legitimacy, is what needs to be defeated. The means of doing
this, calls for a deeper understanding of the causes of the mindset that gives rise to terrorism, but one that seems largely lacking among today's leaders. One thing that history emphatically demonstrates is that appeasement and
accommodation cannot defeat terrorism. Also, terrorism cannot be treated as a law enforcement problem. It must be treated as war, in which, as in war, one has to be prepared to accept casualties.

This central fact is what Mr. Putin recently and Haleku Khan and
Baybars centuries ago demonstrated. The present US approach with its hair-splitting theology of making good terrorists fight bad
terrorists will only strengthen the terrorists who can easily change color as General Musharraf has repeatedly done. This also sows confusion and distrust in the minds of allies and victims of terrorism. The message is clear: terrorism cannot be finessed, it must be fought head on.

N.S. Rajaram (nsrajaram@v...)

___________________

Dr. N.S. Rajaram is a mathematician and linguist, and the author of several books on history. His latest book is Nostradamus and Beyond: Visions of Yuga-Sandhi, published by RUPA of Delhi.

[Hisardut]

Eternity in Bacon... Pre-Packaging for the Allah Express
Muslims believe they cannot enter heaven if they're contaminated with pork.
So maybe it's time for Israel and others to wrap dead terrorists in pigskin and lard.
This is what the Russians (who understand far better than Americans and Israelis
how to deter Muslim terrorists) are doing with Chechen terrorists.

While this does seem to be an innovative idea, it is miscalculated. The claim that these terrorists do what they do for religious purposes is misjudged. In their minds, they are dying for the greater good. While their goals and acts are not human and completely miguided, I doubt they do this solely for religion. When Japanese pilots crashed their planes purposely into naval carriers, they didn't commit these suicide runs for God, they did it for the greater good of the Emprie of Japan. Wrapping dead terrorists in pigskin may deter a few, but it will anger many more. And those people will be more steadfast in their goal of the destruction of Israel and its people.

[danholo]

Originally posted by whereamigod
The claim that these terrorists do what they do for religious purposes is misjudged.

You're right. Organizations like Islamic Jihad and Hamas have nothing to do with religion...

In their minds, they are dying for the greater good.

I guess they want to die for the sake of it being the greater evil?

While their goals and acts are not human and completely miguided, I doubt they do this solely for religion.

Of course they don't do it for the religion, but for Palestine. But religion is one of the tools used to brainwash these poor puppets into killing themselves. I guess 72 virgins and other promises of materialistic and eternal bliss does the trick.

My point was not religion but reactions and effects if the Israeli's made that decision.

[Mediocrates]

But of course they wouldn't. Only crazy with dreams of genocidal war institute such a thing. Fact is, no matter how much some people want to paint Israelis as savages this is simply something that would never happen.

hi , every one

first iam muslim and here to tell you who is Mohammed add what Islam

First : for the prophet Muhammad's prayers and peace but he knew the Jews and especially the clergy of them and they know who is good and they know that the picture in place by now are not fully correct.

Second : On the subject of Jihad in Islam has analyzed Jihad in the two cases : 1-in the event of an enemy attack on the land of Muslims yourself You Zionists.
2-in the case of prevention advocates to call all the people of the land forceful means.

[Yala]

Can someone please alert Sharonb and Tzanchan that one of their friendly neighbors has come to the forum to talk peace with them?

Originally Posted by Yala

Can someone please alert Sharonb and Tzanchan that one of their friendly neighbors has come to the forum to talk peace with them?

isreal and it's people should talk and lestin to it's neiboughrs instead of clash with them.
it's the only way, otherwise things going to be worse and woers for jews.

[HaTzEl]

Originally Posted by Zoriel

isreal and it's people should talk and lestin to it's neiboughrs instead of clash with them.
it's the only way, otherwise things going to be worse and woers for jews.

How can you talk with your's neighbours if they wanna destroy you?

Originally Posted by HaTzEl

How can you talk with your's neighbours if they wanna destroy you?

No, this is not true ..
King Abdullah of KSA offers a total normalization with full diplomatic relationship not only with SA, but with all Arab countries :
Result Israel rejescts.

[Mil]

isreal and it's people should talk and lestin to it's neiboughrs instead of clash with them.
it's the only way, otherwise things going to be worse and woers for jews.

Israel offered talks in 48 and all they years there after. The problem are the disunited Arabs and their dictatorial nationalism then one small Israel.

Israel does not run the Arab world...

At the end of Steven Spielberg’s movie "Munich", the Israeli Mossad agent who led the team that assassinated many of the Munich Olympics terrorists, invites the chief Mossad agent in charge of the operation to dinner. The older chief sits back in his Tel Aviv office throughout the picture, fretting far less about the human scale of what is going on than about accounting -how much the operation is costing. The operation got messy to the point of ineptness, some people dying who didn't have to die, IDF commandos being dragged in at one point in an exercise that was supposed to be "secret".

The young assassins perpetrating Israel's will got blood on their hands, while the bean counter back in Tel Aviv didn't. What may have been a generational rift at one point became a moral chasm by the end of the operation. The assassins were now lepers whom the bean counter despised as social pariahs. We know that he isn't alone in his attitude. We know all this by the end of the picture, so we know the hypocritical complexities wrapped up in the older agent's response to the dinner invitation. "No," he says, looking the young man in the eye. "No," he says again as he breaks his gaze, staring down into the street now, a look of disgust washing his face at the proposition ever having been raised in the first place.

Terrorists know there are two types of people in this world. There are those who will level a gun at a terrorist's head and pull the trigger, and then there are those who moralize about the former, thinking that terrorists can be negotiated with, their existence only owing to the fact that someone else is willing to pick up their guns and do their dirty work for them. “Peace” with terrorists is purchased with bullets, but the world is full of self-delusional cowards who will always think otherwise.

[HaTzEl]

Originally Posted by Zoriel

No, this is not true ..

Hamas wanna destroy Israel.

Hezbollah wanna destroy Israel.

Peace with Egypt exist only on the paper.

Syria bankroll Hezbollah... Iran the same and Ahmadinejad had declarated that "Israel must be wiped out by the map".

It isn't true?

[KettleWhistle]

Originally Posted by Zoriel

No, this is not true ..
King Abdullah of KSA offers a total normalization with full diplomatic relationship not only with SA, but with all Arab countries :
Result Israel rejescts.

Israel didn't reject. Israel simply didn't respond to something that had unacceptable conditions by default. This offer was nothing more than a publicity stunt as it didn't contain any serious propositions.