The Strategy of Jihad

When all is said and done, it is the the Koran, and how it is weaponized that will decide the fate of the Ummah. It is the Koran which creates the Ummah, and it is the Koran that enjoins the Ummah of all  Muslims to the cause of Islam, and its increase. The Koran provides both a strategy of acquisition and warfare as well as a strategy of negotiation. The imperative to the acquisition of people and land is called jihad. The Ummah is a trans-tribal concept created by Mohammad. A part of the acuity of its invention is that the Ummah explicitly creates a larger political entity than the tribe. The tribe was Mohammad's conundrum. Imposing Allah's primacy, from among the shared deities of the competing tribes in the pantheistic world of the 7th century Arab peninsula, was his key to selling the bargain to the tribes. His unique and personal intercession with Allah was his key to personal political durability and supremacy. For the Arab tribes, the benefits would be huge.

The essence of jihad is extortion, intended to inflict an opt-out or opt-in duality of choice on its subjects. Both choices are accounted for in the Koran to the benefit of the Ummah. The mechanism of jihad is personal violence. Capitulation is to be its own reward, as the wealth and women of all of the kuffar--non-Muslims, are progressively subsumed into the Ummah, at ts pleasure. Those blessed Muslims who die in the furtherance of jihad will have sold their lives in a guaranteed bargain with Allah, for a worry-free eternity in paradise, with all expenses paid and with on-demand access to 72 eternally virgin concubines, thrown in for good measure. Go to sea on jihad, and a shahid's virgins double to 144. For the kuffar who refuse capitulation it means execution for the crime, or dhimmitude: 2nd class legal status, humiliating cash-tax penalties and constant apprehension within your family, if you choose to live.

Individual Muslims, as part of the Ummah, are solemnly enjoined by the Koran to refrain from attacks upon other Muslims, so as not to fracture the interests of the Ummah against the kuffar. This injunction is often breached in practice when recalcitrant Muslims, themselves, need further instruction on the seriousness and severity of jihad, or, if they just get in the way. Islam is a total belief system, encompassing and mandating specific personal moral, physical, dietary, sexual and hygienic behaviors, as well as the public, political and "religious" expressive aspects of life. Those "rightly guided" Muslims who die as incidental collateral damage in the pursuit of jihad by their betters, also get a pass to paradise. Allah sorts them out.

Al-Qaida Snorts at China-& Calls for Jihad

The Chinese, as they have asserted their right to defend themselves from the Islamists, are now finding themselves in the cross hairs of the सिक्क Al-Qaida Islamic tribalists. China, on a per capita basis, consumes more pig meat than anywhere else on the planet. Abu Yahya al-libi, a Libyan national, has spoken:

A leading Al-Qaeda militant on Wednesday called on Muslims worldwide to defend Uighurs in China's restive northwestern region of Xinjiang. He told Uighurs to prepare for a holy war or Jihad and urged a "vast media campaign" to raise awareness of their fate at the hands of "oppressive" China.

In the video posted to jihadist websites, Abu Yahya al-Libi appeared to launch a frontal assault against China.

"This massacre is not being carried out by criminal Crusaders or evil Jews who have committed crimes against ओउर नेशन," al-Libi stated.

"Today, a new massacre is being carried out by Buddhist nationalists and communists against the Muslim population in eastern Turkestan," said al-Libi.

"Thousands of people have died from the radiation emitted by the many nuclear missiles that have been launched and the experiments carried out in the area," al-Libi concluded.

One can only hope they have enough tin-foil hats--and pork spits.

LIBERAL AVG

Does nothing ever change? Looking back on the so-called "Golden Age" of the Roman Empire, 50 years after the death of Nero, here is the emperor Hadrianvs Avgvstvs (Hadrian), the second of the adoptive emperors advertising his standard method of mollifying the Roman population to keep them quiet in the face of his foreign and domestic policies. Like Barack Obama, Hadrian toured Europe and visited Egypt, giving speeches and making his presence known. And like Barack Obama, Hadrian used his government to provide cash handouts for his clients and supporters. He issued coins like the one above and similar ones, in their millions, commemorating his every exploit, as if they were tweets, the better to remind the people of his generosity and his patronage.

On the reverse of the coin above, a silver denarius, the emperor is shown sitting on a raised platform behind two officials, one with an abacus, while the other dispenses cash to a citizen who stands, unapologetically before the dais, the folds of his robe open to receive the coins. Under the dais the inscription reads LIBERAL AVG, a commemoration which remains to this day, 1,890 years after the minting of this coin, an easily understood paradigm for political success.

Like Hadrian, Obama is a famous patron of the arts. Like Hadrian, Obama has the the support of the glitterati and the governing elites. Like Hadrian, Obama has forbidden torture.
Like Hadrian, Obama is a fervent (albeit hetero), supporter of gay rights. As Hadrian did, so is Obama in the process of surrendering his predecessor's conquests in Mesopotamia to the Persians. Like Hadrian, Obama has taken the side of the Palestinians against the Jews. In fact, it was under Hadrian that the land formerly known as Judea came to be called Palestine for the very first time. Like Hadrian after his death, Obama has been "deified", despite being still in office. It remains to be seen whether Obama will continue to channel Hadrian, that most benevolent of autocrats, in forming his own version of the frumentarii: loyal followers who, at the the emperor's insistence acted as his personal spies.

Despite being called by some of his critics ignorant of the past, it seems pretty clear that Barack Obama is well on his way to re-enacting almost verbatim, a fairly sophisticated slice of history. Of the ancient and imperial variety.

Sustainability: Mediocre Goals for Mediocre Spirits

All too often, in today's greenspeak parlance, "sustainable" means subsidized. It doesn't have to be, but it has been and continues to be the most disingenuous and egregious of eco-jargon patois passed-off as earth-friendly by the progressive non-profits , corporatists, and other rent-seekers of the left. All of the HOV pomposity of the planet-savers and the LEED certified architects at their conventions can't make it otherwise, despite all of their earnest declaiming and seriousness of purpose.

Here's the reality: if a green system, concept, product or energy solution is being offered as "sustainable", and its use therefore imperative, it should be assumed unless it can be demonstrated otherwise, that there is a government subsidy embedded somewhere within it to propagate it. It might be a mandate, it might have its production or labor costs underwritten, its competition may be abolished or selectively taxed, or perhaps some level of government is its primary customer. If any system or concept or energy solution is being referred to as "unsustainable", then, almost invariably, it is privately financed, already, or about to come under government oversight, and probably involves hunting, mining, drilling, manufacturing, cropping or fishing, in one form or another in exchange for money at market prices. The trendier opponents of such "unsustainable" activities will tend toward, or even fully embrace, the beliefs that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and a poison and contraception is "the cheapest way" to combat "global warming". Doomsday is right around the corner.

Rent-seekers are completely predictable (and sought after) by government bureaucracies, and their goals are therefore "sustainable". They are the segment of society the bureaucrat can most readily plan for--and measure. Instead, the entrepreneurs, the wildcatters, the venture capitalists, the innovative production farmers and independent inventors of all stripes, who, by engaging in risk-taking endeavors beyond legislative imagination create and maintain with their hard work and incremental improvements the technical and theoretical bases of all advances in civilization, these are the "unsustainable" ones: yet they are as indispensable as they are incommensurate. These are the people who have no need to fill in the endless and intricate government grant and assistance forms that keep the union bureaucrats at their desks working so diligently day-in and day-out. They ask for nothing more than an opportunity and a marketplace. In a politically-driven economy such behavior is discouraged to the point of being unsustainable.

The Magic Beans of ObamaCare

The Democrats controlling the U.S. Congress are ready to trade the wizened cow of economic sanity for the magic beans of ObamaCare. For many of us, like silly Jack, magical thinking transcends good sense and a hopeful and enticing story is enough to persuade. Leading us along down this road, are our representatives, and others with a callous will to power and political advantage.

The story is that the American "healthcare" system is "broken" and can only be fixed by falling one and all, into the welcoming arms of the federal government. As has become customary, the government will use private businesses to the greatest degree possible to implement their plans, just as they currently compel them to be their (uncompensated) revenue collectors and record keepers for sales, income and excise taxes to fund everyday government operations.

I have heard, anecdotally, albeit, that some 30% of current so-called "healthcare" costs are actually due to bureaucratic office overhead. Paper shufflers within the organizations of the health care providers' offices that process invoices and claims upon their patients' insurance policies and the not-inconsequential associated government-mandated paperwork are ostensibly drawing-off some very big money on careers that add substantially to the cost of insurance premiums, without ever providing a lick of actual "healthcare" themselves. In addition, there are government bureaucrats in their thousands, at every level, who spend their lives as the polar opposites of their private counterparts, sorting, approving, collating and monitoring their activities and reporting to their own legislative and executive overlords who never stop creating evermore time-swallowing procedural mandates and substantive regulations requiring compliance.

Add to that the extra 10% or 15% Americans pay for all of the medical research and development financed by American companies that socialized countries don't perform but benefit from, and another 10% or so for individual state-mandated coverages, plus the aging, litigious, and increasingly risk-averse U.S. population that expects to live forever at any cost, (and God-only-knows how much for the new marble and oak-paneled clinics and hospitals that have recently become the standard) and there you have reasons that the health sector is marauding through and fast gobbling-up the rest of the U.S. economy. Not to mention the small army of actuaries and attorneys at $200K per year, both in and out of government, that are milking the system on a daily basis.

Lost somewhere in that cacophony of compliance behaviors, lawsuits, marketing costs and paper-pushing are the patients, their doctors and their nurses. Much of the conundrum is a direct result of the legal, financial and social interventions of today's government policies and prescriptions imposed upon the business of doctoring and patient care. So, as is typically the case in Washington, the solution for bad government today is even more government tomorrow.

As Mark Steyn has put it:

Well, says the president, shuffling his cups and moving the pea under another shell, we’re spending too much on health care. By “we’re,” he means you and you and you and you and millions of other Americans making individual choices over which he casually claims collective jurisdiction.

And that, ultimately, gets closer than anything else he says to giving the game away. For most of the previous presidency, the Left accused George W. Bush of using 9/11 as a pretext to attack Iraq. Since January, his successor has used the economic slump as a pretext to “reform” health care. Most voters don’t buy it: They see it as Obama’s “war of choice,” and the more frantically he talks about it as a matter of urgency the weirder it seems. If he’s having difficulty selling it, that’s because it’s not about “health.” As I’ve written before, the appeal of this issue to him and to Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, et al., is that governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture — one in which elections are always fought on the Left’s issues and on the Left’s terms, and in which “conservative” parties no longer talk about small government and individual liberty but find themselves retreating to one last pitiful rationale: that they can run the left-wing state more effectively than the Left can. Listen to your average British Tory or French Gaullist on the campaign trail pledging to “deliver” government services more “efficiently.”

When Jack finally climbs his beanstalk, ascending into the clouds, the giant he finds there will be a leviathan federal government, devouring everything it can grasp. And Jack will hear the giant bellowing as it bears down upon him, as children have heard since long ago, "Be he alive or be he dead, I'll grind his bones to make my bread..."

And that's what passes for "heathcare" reform under this Congress and this administration.

Playing the Hand That's Dealt You

Overlooked in the overwrought and often simple-minded debate over the nature of the now famous photo-shopped image of Obama as the Joker, is the underlying and essential playing cardness of it all. The Joker is after all, the quintessential wild card in the game. Even 5 of a kind is possible when the Joker is in the deck. Obama as the Joker strikes me as a possible metaphor for devious political shape-shifting or changability, and as such, is a completely legitimate means of graphically expressing a complex idea in a complex arena.

Is the image racist? I don't see it, but I can say that it's entirely irrelevant to the artist's message--that is, to the artist who seized the internet image from the original phot0-shopper and put the text SOCIALISM under Obama's photo-shopped face and turned the image into a political poster. As such the two of them became accidental collaborators in a type of gestalt pattern recognition relay of messages. In the aggregate it strikes me as more of a warning to the voters, not to Barack Obama. What he looks like isn't what he is--He can be anything.

Wikipedia states:

The Joker's use is greatly varied....Often, the joker is a wildcard, and thereby allowed to represent other existing cards. The term "Joker's Wild" originates from this practice, as does the game show of the same name....The Joker can be an extremely beneficial, or an extremely harmful, card.

In the Tarot deck there are different properties associated with the card, where it known as the Fool, and from that it's apparent that the figure of the Joker is an ancient one having varied and subtle cultural meanings over time. Batman's Gotham nemesis was fond of leaving a Joker behind as his calling card. Whatever else may be true, it is clear that when you decide to play with the Joker in the deck, the normal rules will no longer apply. In your hand, the Joker can be what you want. But what happens when the Joker can make you become what he wants?

Scots Judge Boots Lockerbie Bomber Out of UK's Free Health Care System

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the terminally ill convicted Lockerbie bomber, has been released from Greenock prison in Scotland. After spending no more than a fortnight in custody for each of the 270 victims killed in the 1988 Panam flight 103 bombing, the Libyan Arab terrorist has been returned home to Tripoli where he was cheered by 1000's of his fellow countrymen, proving correct the mother of one of his victims: Susan Cohen, who lost her 20-year-old daughter in the attack, is reported to have said in response to recent rumors ahead of the impending release, "If you send him back, he will be a hero and Gaddafi will be able to forget the whole thing."

He was allowed to return home on compassionate grounds Scottish officials said, after doctors said he is suffering from terminal prostate cancer and may have only three months to live.

Al-Megrahi, 57, served only eight years of the life sentence imposed after his 2001 conviction.

Under a deal struck between former PM Tony Blair and the Libyan leader Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi in 2008, the release takes the UK's NHS off the hook for footing the bill for al-Megrahi's hospital care for his terminal prostate cancer. The NHS, suffering itself from crippling cost overruns was no doubt cheering politely along with the raucous Libyan mob at the move, over the savings that will be realised. Further, no UK funds will need be expended on a proper Islamic burial for Mr. al-Megrahi, either.

He was released over the objections of Australian and U.S. officials, who obviously have no concern for the problems of socialised medicine in the UK. Most of the victims were U.S. citizens on their way home for Christmas.

Baghdad Reverts to Form

Truck bombs and mortars exploded across Baghdad yesterday killing scores and wounding hundreds in coordinated attacks. Without the American forces standing watch over their every move, the former seat of the Abbasid caliphate is steadily reverting back to petty, corrupt and bloody form. Is there an Arab society that is not utterly and intractably violent and corrupt?

We waste our American military forces, honorable volunteers all, by using them to fight as surrogates in intra-Ummah battles; a no-win scenario if ever there was one. Just look at the recent victory party Maliki threw to celebrate the withdrawal of the American 'occupiers'. In that sense, Afghanistan will be just another not-so-instant re-play. Where is the overarching strategy for the West? This was President Bush's entirely avoidable error.

GWB had the courage of his convictions, but lacked knowledge and historical imagination or he couldn't have done what he did. He also gets a 'D' for the quality of his political leadership skills in my view (speaking as a 2-time GWB voter). All-in-all, Iraq has been and continues to be, just another in a long line of corrupt Islamic tribal sinkholes for American lives and treasure. Remember, the successes of General Petraeus' tactics were driven by American cash money--greasing the palms of the sheiks. When the money ran out as the Iraqi government took over, so did they.

As far as this having been an illegal war--such a meaningless thing does not exist, and can't--war is entirely about the intention of imposing one's own idea of what 'legal' is by use of force. Either you win or you don't. But fighting and winning a war only to install a Sharia-based Islamic constitution is just plain stupid.

update 8/28/2009

Afghanistan president Karzai takes a page out of Maliki's playbook to put distance between himself and the U.S.A. for domestic political advantage as the Afghan election results get sorted out. Whichever Muslim comes out on top, be it by way of the ballot box or force of arms, Western aims will be inevitably degraded and diminished because Shariah law is consistently allowed to trump the naive "hearts and minds" suasions of the infidel. Playing with Muslims by Muslim rules, so as not to "offend" them by adhering to our own culture, will always produce the same sorry outcome.

One Flew Over the Climate's Nest

Skeptics of climate change orthodoxy--that is, of the human-caused/human-correctable variety of climate change, as earnestly espoused by our world-government-in-waiting as well as by the once reputable but currently true-believing National Geographic Society, now have something else to worry about.

Serious investigations have recently begun into understanding and correcting the underlying psychological dysfunction of the AGW-skeptical brain, and its for our own good--as a species. Better that the American Psychological Association can provide the government with the insights and psychological tools with which to break down our political resistance and turn us around before we skeptics have to be (justifiably!) sent off to the treason tribunals for climate change deniers. And it's not just for our own good--the very future of the planet is at stake.

Correlating decades of interrelated research, a task force chaired by Janet Swim, PhD, of Penn State University, made its presentation to the 117th annual APA convention in Toronto, Canada, the Association convention's surprisingly frequent home-away-from-home destination, on August 7. Discussing the means and methods of behavioral modification to unblock the sadly ill-informed and closed-minded prejudice of the skeptics was only a part of task force's report and its public policy recommendations.

The task force identified other areas where psychology can help limit the effects of climate change, such as developing environmental regulations, economic incentives, better energy-efficient technology and communication methods.

"Many of the shortcomings of policies based on only a single intervention type, such as technology, economic incentives or regulation, may be overcome if policy implementers make better use of psychological knowledge," the task force wrote in the report.

Because this is presumably a government-financed study, we are I'm sure, intended to understand it as impartial and even-handed, just as are most of the other $79B worth of government-funded global climate warming hope-and-change studies, right? How can I tell? It doesn't say a single thing about electro-shock treatments yet, so far as I know. Let's hope the next APA convention isn't being held in Chicago.

Cloud Ship Earth

When it comes to cooling the planet, this is a much better idea than spraying particulates into the upper atmosphere, or sending giant mirrors into outer space. Or so they say. It certainly makes for a way-better illustration opportunity (compliments to Telegraph.co.uk). The current fantasy, as it is explained in the article, is to build a global fleet of 1900 immense unmanned, satellite-directed robot ships to inject sea water high into the atmosphere to create fluffy salt-seeded clouds on demand to reflect the sun's heat back into space. On an as-needed basis. Or something. It's amazing to me that there are still folks out there who do not consider the U.N. to be a special interest group. Anyway, my favorite aspect of articles like these (aside from the groovy sci-fi illustrations) is actually the wacky and insightful comments and here are my favorites today:

These clowns have finally have made the L. Ron Hubbard Stage. The Cloud Ship concept is amazing. Your gonna have to create several million tons of thrust to make the upper atmosphere. The Water Ammo will kill all animals in a hemispheric pattern at a rate of 28 miles and raise the water temperature more than 17%

The economic crisis must be the real myth if this is how we are spending our $$$.

The only thing missing here is the little box with a dial that will regulate the amount of cloud to be generated by these ships. This "world thermostat" will, of course, be installed in Al Gore's office at the top of his ivory tower.

painting California WHITE would be a lot cheaper, and would do more to slow global warming...and is at least as practical as the ideas in this article.

What could possibly go wrong?

In the name of fighting climate change, they are going to do some real damage to the planet. If they think that "global warming" is bad, just wait until they cause the next Ice Age.

This too funny, cause I just read an article that said clouds trap atomospheric heat in. And "The Goracle" says the science is settled. Go figure.

Has anyone mentioned yet that when the salted rain falls onto the surface into the top soil that it will kill all life on the planet? That's a surefire way to stop global warming.

its a great idea so long as i can invest in the company

Why bother spending all that money when mother nature has been cooling the earth for free since 1998.

If the global warming zealots don't stop soon they're going to discredit science in general in the eyes of the public. This is and always has been an absurd theory that would have died a natural death long ago if it hadn't been propped up by politically motivated research grants. That grant money has now so thoroughly corrupted atmospheric science, we can't trust anything that so-called climatologists or atmospheric scientists say.

Why not just blast Al Gore into a low orbit and let his fat a$$ block a few tenths of a percent of sunlight. We'll go get him when earth cools back down.

Whenever I start to think about how reckless, irresponsible and/or just stupid the American media has become, I just head on over to the UK. It makes me realize that, by comparison anyway, the US media could be worse.

They want to cut down on CO2 and sunlight....it sounds like a war on plants to me.

HA, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Was this a Saturday Night Live skit? No......It's for real? Who let the inmates run the insane asylem?

It looks like it will work better than than cap & trade and will be much cheaper!

Will National Geographic be endorsing this? Polar bears are waiting.

Already doing this with the chemtrails try looking up for once.

Why not just shift the orbit of the moon to give total solar eclipses every day? ;)

What a ridiculous idea! Don't mess with Mother Nature. Why don't we send some freezer ships to the arctic to make ice for the polar bears...

"Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant" James Madison.

make lots of dry ice and store it at the poles. dont forget to plant a tree.

And I presume these magical unmanned ships will be powered by unicorn farts and rainbows, and protected from pirates who can spot the plumes a hundred miles away by fierce dragons.

It just proves scientists can be insane too.

1,900 ships plying the oceans, and no carbon footprint! fueled by pixie dust, I'm sure.

Unmanned? Perhaps they will have cameras so we can watch pirates steal them.

They tried this on Futurama and it still didnt work. Whats next? a giant space ice cube dumped into the ocean?

Cloud ships? Bwahahahahaha.

Now if only global warming were real, we would have a solution.