US declares 'total war' on Islam

 In an organized act of brutality, a number of US soldiers went on a house-to house shooting spree in Zangabad village, Kandahar in March and massacred 16 people including nine children while they were sleeping and all Washington had to say were a few words of condolence and apology nonchalanty strung together in order to appease the overwhelming public rage in Afghanistan. Western media howere reduced the number of the killers to one.
__________________________________________________________________

 The bodies were reportedly wrapped in blankets and were set on fire.

US President Barack Obama said he was deeply saddened, "I offer my condolences to the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives, and to the people of Afghanistan, who have endured too much violence and suffering. This incident … does not represent the exceptional character of our military and the respect that the United States has for the people of Afghanistan."

As contradictory as these words seem, the very 'exceptional character' of the US military had earlier urged them to burn copies of the Holy Quran, an incident which saddened the hearts of Muslims all across the world.

These and earlier incidents are not coincidental and well attest to a prevailing mindset in the US military and a dominant policy in Washington. It is clear that the US government has commenced a large-scale campaign against Islam with the express intention of debilitating the Muslim community.

In fact, the war on Islam started in 2001 when the then US president George Bush made a crass reference to his so-called war on terror as ‘crusade’. He warned Americans that "this crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take awhile." Bush’s politically untoward remark rang alarm bells in Europe and the Muslim world although it went barely noticed in the American community who took the word for its sound rather than for its meaning.

Gradually, Washington instilled a sensation of anti-Islamism in America and Europe by attributing the nine-eleven tragedy and ensuing terrorist operations to the Muslims. Soheib Bensheikh, Grand Mufti of the mosque in Marseille, France said Bush’s use of the word ‘crusade’ was most unfortunate and that “It recalled the barbarous and unjust military operations against the Muslim world" by Christian knights.

A delusional man who was overwhelmed with the idea of a messianic mission, George Bush wittingly or unwittingly dragged the world to the margins where a clash of civilizations was imminent.

The legacy of hatred which was started by George Bush was later continued in the form of classes and organized trainings.

In line with this Islamophobic policy funded by Washington and the powerful Zionist groups in the country, the US military has long been involved in fomenting anger and hatred against the Muslims by teaching its future leaders that a “total war” against the Muslims would be necessary to protect America.
According to hundreds of pages of course material and reference documents obtained by Danger Room (wired.com), the US military held a course at the Defense Department’s Joint Forces Staff College and taught the students that they had to use a Hiroshima-style in Muslim counties and target the “civilian population wherever necessary.”

The officer in charge of the hate lessons was Army Lt. Col. Matthew A. Dooley who still maintains his position at the Norfolk, Virginia College. Sadly, those who sat in his classes are now in the top positions in the US military.

The course ‘Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism’ was offered five times a year for groups of 20 at a time, the course may have been taught to as many as 800 mid-level and senior US military officers.

In a July presentation, Dooly said, “We have now come to understand that there is no such thing as ‘moderate Islam. It is therefore time for the United States to make our true intentions clear. This barbaric ideology will no longer be tolerated. Islam must change or we will facilitate its self-destruction.”

In his ugly lessons, he taught that “International laws protecting civilians in wartime are no longer relevant,” and that mainstream Muslims are dangerous, because they’re violent by nature. He also called for a Hiroshima-style destruction of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

Those who sat in his classes and patiently listened to his mad remarks are the ones who are now serving in Afghanistan and teaching the same hate lessons to their subordinates and even encouraging them to wipe out the Muslim community.

The atrocities perpetrated by the US military in the Muslim countries over the past 11 years or so are closely associated with and inspired by these appalling teachings.

Washington and the Zionist groups have long been making relentless efforts to depict Islam and the Muslims in dark shadows. An in-depth investigation into Islamophobia ‘Dubbed as Fear, Inc. The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America’ was carried out by the Center for American Progress in the United States. The report sheds light on the collective efforts of the Zionist groups funded by the United States in pedaling a hatred for and a fear of Islam in the form of books, reports, websites, blogs, and carefully crafted talking points. According to the report, these wealthy donors and foundations also provide direct funding to anti-Islam grassroots groups.

The project of Islamophobia which has cost more than $40 million over the past ten years has been funded by seven foundations in the United States: 1. Richard Mellon Scaife Foundation; 2. Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation; 3. Newton and Rochelle Becker; 4. Foundation and Newton and Rochelle Becker Charitable Trust; 5. Russell Berrie Foundation, Anchorage Charitable Fund and William Rosenwald; 6. Family Fund; 7. Fairbrook Foundation.

After all, Islamophobia is nothing new. Despite its rising upsurge in recent years, there have been efforts in the past to promote this pernicious trend.

Years ago, prominent Orientalist Edward Said warned of these calculated efforts in the West, arguing that the essentializing nature of the Orientalist enterprise has resulted today in misguided, inaccurate depictions of Islamic cultures: “Most of the pictures represent mass rage and misery, or irrational (hence hopelessly eccentric) gestures. Lurking behind all of these images is the menace of jihad. Consequence: a fear that the Muslims will take over the world.”

Islamophobia is a form of political colonialism; an ideological war against Islam and the Muslims. It is a pernicious practice used by Washington and its allies to justify their lust for Muslim blood, give validity to their military expeditions in Muslim countries and seize hold of their numerous resources.
 _____________________________________________________________________

Islam Times



Thank You For Reading

Post-Osama strategic environment

CIA chief Leon Panetta`s venomous assertion that they kept Islamabad out of the loop on the operation because it could jeopardise the Abbottabad operation and "might alert the targets" Panetta indeed came out in the true colours of an "Ugly American". Too eager to deny even an iota of credit to his arch competitor ISI, Panetta went ballistic to the extent of embarrassing President Obama by contradicting his statement.

Air Commodore (R) Khalid Iqbal

America’s military men who conceived, planned and executed Operation ‘Geronimo’ (Abbottabad attack) deserve highest recognition for their professional competence. This brilliant operation will always be bracketed with its other prestigious cousins like Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour (1941), Israel’s hostage rescue operation from Entebee (1976), attack on Iraqi nuclear reactor by Israeli (1981), etc. For decades, this operation shall be critically analysed at exalted military training institutions. Such operations are few and far between and they leave lasting scars for those on whose soil these are executed. Americans are yet to forget their “Pearl Harbour.” It is unfortunate that Osama was in Pakistan and such a humiliating mission was conducted on Pakistani soil. Pride of a common Pakistani stands severely bruised. At the same time, this mission shall always be cited by the international jurists as precedent of blatant violation of the UN charter and international norms.Not withstanding the marvels by the boys at arms, Osama’s dramatic demise is likely to raise as many questions as it may be able to answer. It appears that mission was designed to proclaim Osama as dead with no provision for capturing him alive. Indecent haste in which his body was deposed off in the sea would always keep a question mark on the authenticity of the event. Given previous assertions of death of Osama, it would have been in the fitness of the things to arrange at least a transparent funeral if not a befitting burial for him. Orchestration of the event has generated an impression as if previously occurred death has been regularised through a well planned action to create an aura of “Mission Accomplished,” prior to drawdown. Marine Colonel Bob Pappas has been saying for years, that death of Osama might have taken places at Tora Bora on December 13, 2001, or any time later, as many such claimants have been postulating. One understands that conflicts like Afghanistan don’t end in neat; they do not give decisive victories for either side. And face saving extrication out of such wars is not an easy task; at times it involves gimmicks of the sorts.Initial comments by President Obama and Hillary Clinton were prudent and well thought out; both acknowledged Pakistan’s cooperation in the event. Our political leadership joyously jumped the bandwagon to take the credit, as if it was a joint Pak-US venture. Nevertheless, real punch was to come from CIA chief Leon Panetta’s venomous assertion that they kept Islamabad out of the loop on the operation because it could jeopardise the Abbottabad operation and “might alert the targets.” Panetta indeed came out in the true colours of an “Ugly American”. Too eager to deny even an iota of credit to his arch competitor ISI, Panetta went ballistic to the extent of embarrassing President Obama by contradicting his statement. He did it earlier also when he made Obama go public on the issue of diplomatic immunity of Raymond Davis. Of now, Panetta has settled his score with ISI which was overdue since rubbing of his nose in the dirt in case of Raymond Davis fiasco. In his fervour, has also dismantled the strategic gain by irreparably rupturing the alliance of the world’s two finest intelligence outfits; whether he has the last laugh is yet to be seen. With likes of Panetta around, terrorist outfits do not need much else to survive and thrive. Strategic impact of this significant event was lost too rapidly. Instead of strengthening the relationship between the US and Pakistan, it turned out to be another Pakistan bashing spree. In the absence of any meaningful post mission brief, media in both the countries went bizarre; anchors were too keen to scale new heights of speculative reporting and mudslinging. Pakistan’s military leadership chose to stonewall for over three days; that gave credence to the speculations that it is not on the same page with the political leadership. No one requisitioned the session of parliament; battalions of new ministers kept taking oath. Interactions with Americans continued uninterrupted as if nothing had happened. It was indeed a strategic collapse of Pakistani leadership that left the masses in a lurch; literally no one was to turn to for a factual picture, also no one was there to provide a healing touch to a common Pakistani, whose ego had been severely hurt. During this tenure of information void, rumours were rife as if political leadership had entered onto some understanding with Washington while circumventing the military leadership and had covertly permitted the conduct of operation. If Panetta is right and the entire operation was a unilateral action by America, those responsible for military response to such intrusions will have to answer many questions. And as it has been conceded that it was an intelligence failure, ISI will have to work very hard to clear this ugly blot. A majority of Americans approve of President Obama in the wake of the killing of Osama bin Laden. Event of this magnitude was bound to create a spike in Obama’s approval rating; however, this is not the beginning of the end of al Qaeda. Despite huge symbolic loss, Osama’s death does not present an existential threat to the movement. In all probability, al Qaeda will not die with him. More than a physical entity, al Qaeda is now a mindset and unless the causes leading to this mindset are addressed, the trouble would go on.As expected paper tigers of India are getting primed to claim credit that they could also emulate American action. Indian Army Chief, General VK Singh, said Indian armed forces were “competent” to carry out a similar operation. “I would like to say only this that if such a chance comes, then all the three arms (of the military) are competent to do this,” Singh told reporters. Indian Air Chief, Air Chief Marshal P V Naik, also joined the melee by saying that India has the capability to carry out such surgical strikes against terrorists. He said, “India can do it.” Rhetoric apart, hopefully Indian services chiefs know the limitations of the forces they command. They need to take a cue from their Home Minister who was more realistic in his approach. He conceded that India could not replicate the American performance, he said: “I’ll tell you why, “We don’t have our forces on Pakistani soil. We are not invited there. We don’t have any support from Pakistan. We are both nuclear weapons states.”Home Minister’s point was carried forth by a budding Indian strategist who wrote anonymously on one of India’s defence related blog: “The Pakistan government will agree to US strikes but not Indian because we are rivals. They will definitely engage us if we intrude into their airspace.” Indian strategist community has widely questioned whether India had the capacity to do so. India is not America, certainly it also does not have the capability but it is suffering from an acute superpower complex. It tends to sleep walk American trajectories. It is likely to be tempted to behave in a similar way. Undoubtedly, in case of such a misadventure India shall court a disaster. Those responsible to generate response to Indian misadventure surely know their job very well.


khalid3408@gmail.com

American Kids React to Osama Bin Laden's Death

 This is a special episode of KIDS REACT - it is important to take pause when historical events occur and to reflect on how the next generation views the actions of our ever changing world. Though this is a more serious subject than our usual episodes, is is valuable to learn from the insights of more innocent eyes than own.






If they only knew, why so called Terrorists hate them ?

Tougher times ahead

It is not just the scrapping off of any planned Pakistan visit of President Barack Obama. Now that the Americans have singularly discredited the Pakistani military and the ISI in the world eye, expect more of their brinkmanship. It will be more of a stick that they would henceforth wield than dangling the carrot to get what they want from this country to perpetuate their objectives here or in the region. With their Abbottabad exploit they have tasted blood. And, predictably, they will now go for more of it in days ahead, particularly so, as on Obama’s watch both the CIA and the Pentagon have struck an unprecedented collaboration in their ranks, with the latter having also enshrined in its charter as one avowed objective to cajole or coerce foreign militaries into its subordination to accomplish its missions abroad.And what would it be here at home if and when they reenact an Abbottabad elsewhere in the country can be well imagined. The citizenry has received a rude shock from their Abbottabad raid. They had etched in their hearts the Pakistani military with a reliable strong face. But this episode showed it to them like a shattered myth as a weakling. In such a poor operational unpreparedness have they found it as had they not imagined even in their wildest dreams. And no heartening is the take it has got so far from the army for its abysmal collapse in contending with the adventurous raid on the fateful night. No convincing explanations are those. And so goes for the air force’s stance. Bluntly, the military was not in a state of operational preparedness required of an armed force of a region where also making the waves are military doctrines like India’s Cold Start, contemplating coordinated surprise, swift and rapid offensive on the ground and from the air on multiple targets simultaneously before open armed hostilities break out and the international community intervenes to disengage. It makes for a bit of consolation that both the army and the air force have instituted inquiries to identify what went wrong on that dark night that they were taken so unawares. And hopefully that investigation will lead them up to plug off the holes in their defence armours not be so caught again. The real consolation, nonetheless, will come to the distraught citizenry if the services give a resounding account of themselves in an eventuality of alien adventurism like the Abbottabad raid.And that necessarily calls for professional competence and excellence, which have been abiding motto of the Pakistan armed forces, but which seemingly have sadly whittled down somewhat, as evidenced sourly by the Abbottabad disgraceful fiasco. That professionalism is easily achievable. Only the military commands have to shed off distractions like real estate enterprises and business and industrial ventures that unnecessarily impede their own professional pursuits and expose their personnel to worldly temptations as well. As in the yore, perfection in professional expertise, training and readiness must be their sole focus. The olden motivation for selfless and flawless soldiery must return to their ranks in its pristine glory.Indeed, there is an imperative need that all the three services team up to give surgical examination to their doctrines in the context of the new world environment, flush with new military outlooks, weaponries and technologies, and dispense with unneeded baggage to acquire powerful muscles to become an effective, invulnerable and invincible force. That may involve unpalatable harsh decisions. But swallowing a bitter pill now to become formidable is no bad bargain. On a more mundane note, they must refuse dabbling in politics in any event, even if invited. Theirs own job is a whole-time job. The civilians must themselves attend to their own responsibilities. Had indeed the political leaderships been so engaged in discharging their responsibilities, possibly there would have been no Abbottabad fiasco. They would have long forged strong coordinations between various tiers of intelligence networks from top to bottom, and the local law-enforcers and CID spooks of Abbottabad would have certainly stumbled on the mysteriously years-long-living residents of the mystifying compound and acted against them. That would have taken away the excuse of raid from the Americans. But these leaderships mostly sleep.

In a bind

Brave words truly are these that have come from the military command and the foreign office mandarinate. But one has heard of this brave talk even in the past that an alien transgression into the Pakistani territory, if repeated, would draw a severe response, only to see it being followed up only half-heartedly or just ignored. And a public seething with rage over the Abbottabad American raid would be least amused by this tall talk. In any case, fundamental issues pertaining to national security have to be decided by the political leadership, not by military commanders or diplomatic corps. And that is where the citizenry is stands so distraught and disenchanted, so befuddling has been this leadership’s act. The ruling elites cannot even imagine how deeply has this American adventurism hurt the nation in its psyche, showing up their nuclear state even worse than a banana republic. And no excuses can soothe their agitated nerves over the state defence apparatus’s indefensible collapse that it reveals. As the American president and his core security and administration team was huddled up together in the situation room watching the raid live on our territory, our own ruling elites were blissfully asleep. That has left the nation in an unbearable psychological shock. And shockingly, instead of steering a bewildered people out of this pathetic predicament, the political leadership has behaved so appallingly waywardly that not even a third-rate leadership would have in such a condition. On the fateful night, the president was all engrossed in his own foray of cobbling up a new coalition for his wobbling government’s sustainability and longevity. And as the day dawned, the prime minister was packing up his baggage for a junket to France. One had expected being the country’s chief executive he would plunge into a flurry of meetings and conferences with the officials to find out what went wrong that the raiders carried out their mission so uninterrupted, interact with political leaderships across the spectrum and hammer out a national response to the American adventurism. Instead, he took the first flight to Paris. His flunkies contend his visit was prescheduled. So what? In such events, even prescheduled visits are postponed. Hasn’t India’s prime minister put off his Afghanistan scheduled visit to be at home at this time, even though the raid took place not on his domain but in a neighbouring territory? There indeed must be something wrong with our top political hierarchs’ upper chambers. As the prime minister is unpacking his baggage, the president is now in his wings for a voyage to Kuwait and Russia, in so abominable a close parody of the globetrotting duo of Musharraf-Shaukat Aziz, who would often cross each other with one taking off from the airport’s one side and the other taking down on the other side. What, after all, had the prime minister to hawk to his French hosts? Load-shedding of power and gas? Runaway unemployment and inflation? Waltzing poverty, squalor and disease? Worsening lawlessness and criminality? Rampaging terrorism, militancy and insurgency? And what else will have the president to sell to his Kuwaiti and Russian hosts, if not all this? Both should have stayed back home. They must understand the country is presently in a dire bind. If anyone has the sweat delusion this Abbottabad raid was the last of America’s adventurism on our land, he better disabuse himself of it, the sooner the better. It would not be. The Americans have made it clear in so many words. Their Friday’s drone attack once again on Datta Khel in North Waziristan must tell this tellingly. In all probability, not just North Waziristan and Quetta but some other places too may face their ground raids, particularly when their real intents about this country are not even known. Nor should India’s blusters be taken any lightly, when even to give effect to their touted Cold Start doctrine they have raised a rapid-action strike South West command to take on Pakistan along their Punjab-Rajasthan sector; and presently are forming up a mountain strike corps and activating their advance air facilities along the Chinese border in pursuance of their doctrine of two simultaneous wars against Pakistan and China under the nuclear overhang.  Both the president and the prime minister sit at home to prepare for the new security threats in-the-making with intensive deliberations with the officials and extensive consultations with cross-sections of the political strands. A consensus action plan they must so evolve to face up to these emerging threats. If for the plan’s diplomatic part, their foreign visits are inevitable they may undertake them latterly. But for the present, they must give up on these junkets.