USA: failed quadrangle of Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia

 

USA: failed quadrangle of Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia

Lee Jay Walker

The Modern Tokyo Times

Obama bows to the King of Saudi Arabia in the full knowledge that this nation is exporting militant Islam and that all apostates from Islam face the death penalty

President Obama likes to talk about human dignity and human rights but clearly he, just like other leaders of America, irrespective if Democrat or Republican, can’t bypass the lure of major military contracts irrespective of the reality of modern day Saudi Arabia.  It also appears that lessons learnt from Pakistan have been zero.  Therefore, today you have two nations which are responsible for so much of global terrorism but ironically both these nations have been military armed and supported politically by America.

It is also abundantly clear that Pakistan is an unstable nuclear power and this nation state is threatened by its own internal policies towards radical　Sunni Islamic organizations and the threat posed by Islamists to the nation state.  Just like Pakistan, the nation state of Saudi Arabia is also unstable in the long-term because the ruling monarchy rules via an “iron-fist” and clearly this nation is the most draconian in the modern world.

If Islamists overthrew the power mechanisms of both governments in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia then a strong and potent military will be bequeathed to radical Sunni Islamists and regional nations, for example India and Israel, will be threatened. 

In both wars in Afghanistan and Iraq it is clear that Sunni Islamic organizations and terrorist organizations were (and continue to be) behind much of the mayhem that engulfed both nations after the tragic events of September 11^th.  Given this, it is abundantly clear that American troops and military forces from other nations who supported America, have been killed because of the policies of so-called allies and this applies to either tacit support, covert support, or by doing little to prevent Sunni Islamists from spreading their hatred in both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Vojin Joksimovich the author of The Revenge of the Prophet, states that “The long-term strategy is proselytism of Islam and Wahhabi Islam in particular.  French scholar Giles Kepel used the term ‘petrodollar Islam’ for a vast infusion of proselytizing wealth from Saudi Arabia.  Proselytism and the checkbook diplomacy long have been the Saudis’ principal foreign policy tools.  The Saudis have built thousands of mosques worldwide.  While the Islamist terrorism is being challenged the petrodollar Islam quest is yet to receive due attention.”   (Page 11 – Revenge of the Prophet by Vojin Joksimovich)

Vojin Joksimovich continues by stating “At the core is the U.S.-Saudi bond starting with the 1945 Quincy Deal signed by President Roosevelt…….Part of the deal was American non-interference in Saudi domestic policies…..At the same time Saudi Arabia is the fortress of strict Wahhabism, its state religion, which represents the most radical branch of Sunni Islam determined to proselytize its version of Islam to the West.  The House of Saud underwrote the religious schools that turn out jihadists, just as it administered charities that funded the jihadists.  Addiction to cheap oil and Saudi petrodollars caused the U.S. to turn a blind eye to Saudi support of the fundamentalist groups linked to terrorism.  A New Statesman report summarized: ‘Bin Laden and his gang are just the tentacles; the head lies safely in Saudi Arabia, protected by U.S. forces.’”

“There is substantive evidence of complicity on the part of prominent Saudi and Pakistani citizens in 9/11.  Nonetheless, the 9/11 Commission and the White House gave the Saudi and Pakistanis a free pass because Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are treated as historic U.S. allies.”  (Page 12 – The Revenge of the Prophet by Vojin Joksimovich)

Turning back to the proposed military deal with Saudi Arabia and continuing support for Pakistan via enormous economic support, it is clear that while America may take note of Israel, the same does not apply to India to any great extent.  After all, from terrorist attacks in Kashmir to the tragic terrorist attack in Mumbai, it is clear that all roads lead back to Pakistan and supporting terrorism directly or covertly or via non-compliance of preventing terrorism, is a reality.

B. Raman (Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi) commented after the leader of India visited Saudi Arabia (Feb 27-Mar 1, 2010) that “Like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia has been following a dual policy on terrorism. It has taken ruthless action against Al Qaeda elements posing a threat to its internal security. At the same time, it has avoided taking action against Wahhabi organizations which have been supporting terrorism in other countries. Many of the so-called charity organizations, which have been funding terrorist organizations in other countries including India and Bangladesh, are of Saudi origin. Despite international pressure on Saudi Arabia to act against such charity organizations and stop the flow of funds to global jihadi terrorism, the action taken by the Saudi authorities has been unsatisfactory.

It would be futile to expect that Saudi Arabia could be of assistance to India in dealing with jihadi terrorism emanating from Pakistan or Bangladesh. There has been a long history of links between jihadi terrorist elements in India and Saudi Arabia ever since the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December, 1992.”    Quotes from Outlook India at http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?264502

Despite this reality, and the fact that Saudi Arabia is spreading radical Sunni Islam to countless numbers of nations it is more than apparent that America, and a host of other democratic nations, are either turning a blind eye or giving tacit approval or intelligence services are sleepwalking into a future nightmare or indeed a combination of all three.

After all, what are democratic nations getting in return in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia?  It appears that the answer is negative because despite vast resources being spent on Afghanistan it is clear that this nation supports killing converts to Christianity from Islam, keeping women in chains, and to maintain the power mechanisms of Islamic Sharia law.

The Taliban and Al-Qaeda are also destabilizing Afghanistan because of the reality of Pakistan and the dangerous game being played by elements within the Pakistan ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence).  For democratic India this is a nightmare and a continuing nightmare because Kashmir and terrorist attacks like Mumbai are clear reminders that “terrorism is a tool within the body politic of Pakistan.”

In Saudi Arabia it is much the same and many Sunni Islamic terrorist attacks in Iraq were because of the involvement of Saudi nationals. This applies to direct terrorist attacks, economic funding, supporting radical Sunni Islamic organizations, spreading propaganda, and weakening the role of the central government in Iraq by playing the Sunn-Shia sectarian card.

At the same time not one single non-Muslim place of worship is allowed in Saudi Arabia and women are trampled on and this applies to preventing women from speaking openly, going shopping in mixed shopping malls, driving cars, and dressing how they desire.  

More alarming for the international community is that Saudi Arabian organizations and charities are spreading a dangerous Wahhabi ideology to many nations, irrespective if to mainly Muslim nations or non-Muslim nations.  Stealth jihad within democratic nations is also a serious issue and it is clear that Saudi Arabia is exporting a two-fold version of Islam and this applies to militant Islam and liberal Islam in order to cause confusion and mayhem, via deceit and ulterior long-term motives.

Therefore, economic support which is being given by Western nations in Afghanistan is merely adding fuel to the fire because it is supporting the implementation of Islamic Sharia law and discrimination against women and non-Muslims.  At the same time by supporting Pakistan and Saudi Arabia the end game from an Islamist point of view is that both nations can spread Islam to distant lands and destabilize other nations by using terrorism.

This means that India is facing the brunt of this failed policy towards Pakistan and radical Sunni Islam is growing within parts of India and of course the terrorist threat is never far away.  In Iraq the same happened because much of the Sunni Islamic instability is based on the Saudi Arabian angle and this applies to terrorism, spreading hatred towards the Shia, and maintaining instability in order that democracy does not threaten the power base of regional despots.

For the Christian community in Iraq which is under siege it is clear that they were mere fodder.  After all, the Christian community was left to face the brunt of radical Islam, and just like the Hindus of Kashmir, they have been abandoned and forsaken in order to appease Islamists and Islamization.  How ironic that Iraq was secular, just like Afghanistan under Najibullah, however, both Iraq and Afghanistan would implement Islamic Sharia law after America became entangled and created a “hornets nest.”

Therefore, the three conservative Islamic nations of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, are allowed to trample non-Muslim minorities and to maintain that women stay in the shadows.  At the same time, militant Islamic organizations are spreading to other parts of the world because of the role of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and the money and educational supply route is creating mayhem within majority Muslim nations and within the non-Muslim democratic world.

Western governments appear to be at a loss because continuing Islamic immigration, radical Islamic organizations, and the radical Islamic convert conveyor belt keeps on churning out jihad at home and enabling Islamists to spread their hatred far and wide.  Meanwhile liberal Muslims jump on the bandwagon and condemn any minor slight against Islam in order to install fear and stealth jihad.  Also, Muslim rights appear to be higher for national governments rather than the rights of the majority because appeasement mode is holding sway.

Vojin Joksimovich states that “The most pressing underlying root cause is the Saudi Wahhabi-led petrodollar hegemony over the Islamic world, typically but not exclusively exercised through organizations like the Muslim World League, Organization of Islamic Conference, various Islamic so-called humanitarian organizations, etc.”

Vojin Joksimovich continues by stating that “It is imperative to starve these terrorist organizations of financial resources and recruits.  The present generation of Western leaders has been unwilling to take bold steps for two primary reasons: The oil addiction in what could be termed Petrolistan as well as the petrodollars ploughed back into the Western economies and various individual and corporate coffers.” Page 305 – The Revenge of the Prophet by Vojin Joksimovich)

It is clear that when communism collapsed in Eastern Europe that Western powers supported democracy and they did not desire to pro-up communism.  However, when it comes to the Islamic world it is apparent that Western powers either pro-up or re-install Islam, Islamic Sharia law, and state control by this indoctrination.

After all, Christians did not fear the role of Islamic Sharia law in the pre-attacked Iraq and irrespective of what people think about Najibullah in Afghanistan it is clear that he at least tried to break the chain.  However, both times America re-enforced the Islamic Sharia law chain by overthrowing the leader of Iraq and by supporting Islamists in Afghanistan.

Could it just be that India is expendable in order to appease Pakistan?  Could it just be that Christians in Iraq were expendable in order to appease the house of Islam?  If so, then are Western societies also expendable with regards to allowing radical Islam to grow and by continuing to allow Muslim immigration which is altering the make-up of many nations in Europe?

Also, why are American troops and allied forces being killed with the tacit approval of so-called allies in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia?  It appears somewhat strange to fight wars in Afghanistan and Iraq while supporting Pakistan and Saudi Arabia on the military and economic front. 

B. Raman in response to recent support by America towards Pakistan stated that “The Pakistan army uses the Punjabi Taliban against India in an attempt to force a change in the status quo in Jammu and Kashmir.  It has been using Al Qaeda, the Pashtun Taliban and their global jihadi allies for extracting money out of the US by dangling the threat of another 9/11 over the US head if it does not pay protection money to the Pakistan army.”

“Despite the blunt words reportedly used by Obama, Mrs. Clinton and Gates in more restricted interactions, more protection money was forthcoming in the form of a five-year commitment (2021-2016) of US $2.29 billion in military aid euphemistically called counter-terrorism assistance.  This will be in continuation of the allocation of US $1.5 billion provided by the George Bush Administration in 2005 and of the civilian aid of US $7.5 billion over five-year period already being provided by the Obama Administration since last year under the Kerry Lugar Act.”  (http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.com)  (October 24, 2010)

This, and the proposed mega military deal by the Obama Administration with Saudi Arabia, merely shows you that the “war on terror” is being fought by propping up allies who are increasing the “war on terror” and exporting Islamic radicalism and terrorism to nations like India, the United Kingdom, and a host of other nation states.

Therefore, despite knowing that Islamists are spreading their hatred from both so-called allies and in the full knowledge that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are exporting radical Islam; it appears that for Obama, and other Western leaders, that the same record must be played.  The hidden danger of this policy and untold carnage which is continuing because of these “two ace of spades (Pakistan and Saudi Arabia)” is alarming many but it appears that it isn’t alarming the people in power in Washington, London, and other nations, who support this policy of “no reward and Islamic appeasement.”

Collectively this means more terrorism and the spread of Islamic militancy and instead of containing Islam it is spreading its power and thought patterns to the democratic world. The situation in blunt terms means that all other faiths are being crushed or persecuted by the allies of America in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia.  However, in the backyard of America and the democratic world we are witnessing the rise of Islam and stealth jihad.  Therefore, it appears that America, India, the United Kingdom, and the free world, must brace itself for either confrontation or to be taken over brick by brick and end up like the graveyard of Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan and Pakistan respectively.

Lee Jay Walker

https://leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://islamicinquisition.wordpress.com

http://themoderntokyotimes.wordpress.com

 

 

 

Islamic radicalism or Islamic liberalism: which is the real threat?

Islamic radicalism or Islamic liberalism: which is the real threat?

Lee Jay Walker  –   The Modern Tokyo Times

Islamic terrorism is spreading its hatred

 

In the 21st century you have two types of Islam and this applies to the systematic persecution of minorities, for example which is happening in Iraq, the Maldives, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and many other Muslim dominated nations.  This violence is aimed at converting minorities or crushing them via dhimittude and systematic persecution.

The other type of Islam is aimed at “stealth jihad” and this comes via liberalism, blatant lies about the real Mohammed, control over the media, playing the persecution card, inter-marriage but with the child or children always being Muslim, and a complete re-writing of history and facts.  At the same time many non-Muslim liberals or the political correct brigade are sowing the seeds for Islamic expansion because of the manipulation of language.

Therefore, it is often perceived that Islamic radicalism is the real threat and not Islamic liberalism, yet how true is this? For history teaches that Islam not only conquered by the sword, but also via liberals who preached a different Islam in order to convert the masses. Yet irrespective if former nations were conquered by the sword or via Sufi mystics or liberal versions of Islam, the outcome was normally the same and this applies to the gradual Islamization of society.  This in turn led to dhimmitude, religious persecution, female exploitation, and backwardness.

Today the sword of Islam is still forcing non-Muslims to convert in nations like Sudan and Somalia, and systematic persecution in majority based Muslim nations is ongoing.  Despite this, many liberals and Western leaders remain silent about the true nature of Islam, the Hadiths, and Islamic Sharia law.  Even worse, many major leaders are praising Islam and it is clear that Islamists are winning the media war in many parts of the world.

For example in the United Kingdom the ex-Prime Minister, Tony Blair, often praised the beauty of Islam and he stated openly that he often reads the Koran. And similar major figures like Prince Charles glorify Islam and he supports Islamic organizations in the United Kingdom. At the same time the mass media ignores major issues like forced conversion, Islamic Sharia Law which discriminates against both women and non-Muslims and other draconian facts about Islam. 

Also, nations like Saudi Arabia  are free to spread their propaganda and build Islamic institutions throughout the West.  Therefore, despite the fact that Saudi Arabia persecutes all non-Muslims it is still clear that this nation can spread false images of Islam and attack nations from within.

At the same time Islamic leaders at major institutions are spreading a liberal version of Islam and if you didn’t know about the “real” Mohammed, you would believe that Mohammed was gentle, loved humanity, treated women with respect and that he was a forerunner of global human rights. Yet the “real” Mohammed made it clear that the enslavement of non-Muslims and war was justifiable in order to spread Islam. Mohammed also stated that male Islamic apostates must be killed and he made sure that non-Muslims were inferior in law and had to pay extra taxes via the system of dhimmitude.

Therefore, while Islamic militants are a threat with regards to Islamic terrorism and persecuting non-Muslims in nations like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and countless other mainly Islamic nations; this does not apply to the whole picture. For in Western Europe, North America, East Asia, and other parts of the world, Islam can not conquer by the sword, yet the message of Islam and Islamization can take place via mass migration and liberal Muslims spreading an enlightened version of Islam, which does not apply in the real “Islamic world.”

Given this, the real threat of Islamization is not via people like Osama Bin Laden when it comes to developed nations.  Instead the real threat is liberal Islam and non-Muslims who are re-writing history.  Also, many liberal nations are bending-over-backwards in order to reach out to the so-called Muslim world, therefore, the stealth jihad is growing and Islam is being protected by the very same liberals who would be crushed and persecuted under Islamic Sharia law.

For example, Karen Armstrong is teaching an alternative history of Islam and her Prophet Mohamme is very different to say the least.  The same applies to Prince Charles and many others, for these people Mohammed was a man of peace and of course they negate to mention that Mohammed supported jihad, that he cleansed Arabia of Jews and Pagans, and that he married a child and so forth.

Therefore, the spread of Islam is growing in nations like the United Kingdom and at least 50,000 people have converted to Islam. Yet why did they convert? Was it because of people like Osama Bin Laden or because of people like Karen Armstrong and Islamic liberals?   Or is it because of other factors like marriage and the fact that little is said about the real nature of Islam?

It is also baffling that religious leaders in the West are also quiet about the threat of Islam or the persecution of non-Muslims in mainly Islamic nations. And when brave religious leaders rebuke Islam, Sharia Law and the Hadiths, they in turn become rebuked by their own co-religionists. Why?

Surely religious leaders have a duty to tell the truth and to warn their co-religionists about Islamic persecution throughout the Muslim world? However, their silence is helping Islam to grow.  Therefore,  how many of the 50,000 British national converts know about the real Mohammed?

Were they told that Mohammed had slaves, had sex with a child, killed Jews and Pagans, attacked caravans, divorced many times, had sex with concubines, and so forth?

The irony is that Osama Bin Laden is a “real” Muslim who follows the teachings of Islam; and even if you hate this person, he at least follows his convictions which have been installed into him from reading the Koran, the Hadiths and Sharia Law. Yet Islamic liberals, like Sufi teachers, are hypocrites and they are the real threat. For once the liberal period of Islam manages to Islamize society, then only one conclusion will happen and this applies to a future society being backward and based on Sharia Islamic Law.

In the past the Islamization of many nations took place either quickly because of forced conversions, massacres, slavery, dhimmitude, and so on.  Or Islamization was slow and Sufi leaders were then sent in order to talk about the love of God and this lead to confusion or to fusions which would lead to Islamic conversion but based on outside influences.

However, this love of God in time became replaced by conservative Islam and non-Muslims were subdued or became a small minority, or in the case of Buddhism and Hinduism in Afghanistan, then being wiped from the face of Afghanistan. Given this, then which is the real threat, is it Osama Bin Laden and fellow Islamists who will wake people up to read about the real nature of Mohammed and Islam.  Or is it Islamic liberals and non-Muslim liberals who are re-writing Islam?

Lee Jay Walker

http://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com
http://themoderntokyotimes.wordpress.com

 

INDONESIA and Ba’asyir, the preacher of hate

Indonesia and Ba’asyir, the Preacher of Hate

By Lee Jay Walker
Tokyo Correspondent  –  THE SEOUL TIMES

Abu Bakar Ba’asyir

The nation of Indonesia is blighted by Islamists who desire to destroy moderate versions of Islam because militants desire to install a new society based on dhimmitude and Islamic supremacy. Therefore, Islamic clerics like Abu Bakar Ba’asyir support the implementation of Islamic Sharia law and his attitude towards non-Muslims is one of hatred when the rhetoric flows.

Abu Bakar Ba’asyir was born in 1938 and he is a leading Islamic cleric in Indonesia and many Muslims view his opinions greatly. However, it must be stressed that Muslim opinion varies greatly in Indonesia and this applies to hardliners and moderates who support the notion of a secular state.

Yet according to Abu Bakar Ba’asyir it is essential that Indonesia is ruled by Islamic Sharia law and he openly glorifies Islamic jihad during bouts of militancy. Therefore, the government of Indonesia is in a flux about how to deal with him and over the decades he was either threatened by authorities in Indonesia or tolerated.

Abu Bakar Ba’asyir and Abdullah Sungkar opened a boarding school in 1972 in order to preach to the next generation about the need to implement Islamic Sharia law in Indonesia. In time both individuals would flee to Malaysia because the Suharto regime was in no mood to bow down to Islamists and Suharto was bent on economic modernization and authoritarian control over the whole of Indonesia.

In 1999 Abu Bakar Ba’asyir returned to Indonesia, however, both he and Abdullah Sungkar gained from their exile in Malaysia because they met leading Islamists and they both understood the need for a collective approach in order to spread Islamic rule.

Therefore, Abu Bakar Ba’asyir and Abdullah Sungkar were involved with Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) which was a lose patchwork of various radical Islamic organizations. The main goal was to create a super-Islamic state which would incorporate Indonesia, Malaysia, the southern Philippines, Brunei, and Singapore (some would also include southern Thailand and Cambodia).

The vastness of this region and the mass complexity is a wonder to behold, however, in the wrong hands it could become a nightmare. 　After all, you have a very diverse mix of ethnic and religious groups and you already have religious bouts of violence between Christians and Muslims in parts of Indonesia and the southern Philippines. More recently, tensions have erupted between Muslims and Buddhists in southern Thailand and passions often run high in Malaysia which is the most diverse nation in the region when it comes to religion.

Therefore the views of Abu Bakar Ba’asyir can’t be ignored or brushed aside so easily because JI have been involved in many terrorist attacks and have been involved in communal violence against Christians in Poso in Indonesia and other areas alongside other groups like Laskar Jihad. Also, more alarming, he often plays around with words and distances himself when needed and just like Islamic terrorist organizations like Laskar Jihad, he/they can melt away from the scene and then come back either through a new organization or a new upsurge in militancy.

Walid Phares, author of “The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy” and other books, stated “We all know that the process to become a Jihadist, is long and tenuous. It needs a Salafi-Wahabi environment to be produced. The question in Indonesia is this: Who is producing the “ideological culture” out of which Jama’ah Islamiah came from? What are the structural webs that produced Laskar Mujahidin (or Laskar e Jihad), or Laskar Jundullah or even the Sulawesi-based Mujahedeen KOMPAK?”

However, the geographical reality of the entire region follows the complexity of ethnicity and religious diversity. Added to this is rampant poverty, cronyism, mismanagement of resources, and vastly different development stages and political infrastructures. Therefore, Islamists have many angles to manipulate and spread their message and you have links between jihadists and senior officials even if these links are on the periphery or based on manipulation by national governments.

Therefore, Walid Phares sums up this complexity by stating that “…the Jihadi “Laskars” around the archipelago are projecting themselves as the “protectors” of the territorial unity of “Muslim Indonesia.” Hence their action against non-Muslims, including in Poso, the Celebes, etc is projected as “in the interest of the nation.” They are trying to emulate Hassan Turabi’s strategy in Sudan: the defense of Islam’s lands.”

Given this, JI moved easily between supporting Muslims during communal violence against Christians in Maluku and Poso in Indonesia; and then to targeting economic and Western interests throughout the region. At the same time you have inter-links between JI, al-Qaeda, MILF (Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Abu Sayyaf and other Islamic organizations.

JI have been responsible for many deadly deeds and this applies to killing 15 people in 2000 after an attack against the Jakarta Stock Exchange and killing many during Christmas Eve bombings during the same year　in Indonesia. They have also spread their terror to the Philippines with several attacks and an attack was thwarted in Singapore. The most deadly attack happened in 2002 with the Bali bombings and more recently two hotels were attacked in Jakarta in 2009.

Returning back to Abu Bakar Ba’asyir he stated in 2002 that “If non-believers have weapons capacity, the funding, then they will go to war against Islam. In the Koran Allah has said they will always wage war against you, they will always attack you as long as they have the capacity.” He further stated that “The government of Indonesia right now is being directed by America to service its needs and the primary need of America is to bury Islam particularly in Indonesia.”

He continues by stating that “…Hence our religion Islam, our nation and our country is currently being threatened by foreign races with all manner of libels, with the bombings in Bali, with explosions everywhere, all of those are the plots of non-believers whose aims are to weaken and profane the believers of Islam.”

Therefore, Abu Bakar Ba’asyir is somehow trying to claim that the Bali bombings were done by non-Muslims and this is similar to the September 11th conspiracy theory. However, this is clearly ridiculous and Osama Bin Laden and other brutal killers are proud of ordering the killings of many innocents and many Islamists have either been caught or were found dead at the carnage they inflicted on others.

These statements can be found on page 166 and 167 of Zachary Abuza’s book called Militant Islam in Southeast Asia, Crucible of Terror. Zachary Abuza also states that “Although Abu Bakar Ba’asyir was named by both Malaysia and Singapore as a prime suspect and a leader of Jemaah Islamiya network, he continued to live and preach openly until October 2002.” He also told Zachary Abuza personally that “I　am not a member of Al-Qaida, but I really respect the struggle of Osama Bin Laden, who has bravely represented the world’s Muslims in their fight against the arrogant United States of America and their allies.”

Yet what logic can be found in these words by Abu Bakar Ba’asyir? After all, Al-Qaida and the Taliban were involved in the massacres of thousands of Shia Muslims in Afghanistan. This was followed by countless numbers of terrorist attacks against Shia Muslims and other non-Sunni’s in Iraq; and of course innocent Sunni Muslims have been killed by radical Sunni Islamists.

Yet in the paranoid world of Abu Bakar Ba’asyir he blames non-Muslims for doing terrorist attacks, despite clear evidence that they were done by Islamists. Then he praises Osama Bin Laden who ordered the killings of thousands of Muslims and non-Muslims, after all, according to the theories of Osama Bin Laden then killing innocents in cold blood is justified and a religious Muslim duty.

Amazingly, some Muslims and converts to Islam are still being brainwashed and manipulated by people like Abu Bakar Ba’asyir. He and Osama Bin Laden glorify religious martyrdom but then hide either behind words and the manipulation of language, in the case of Abu Bakar Ba’asyir; or when applied to Osama Bin Laden, then he just hides but orders other people of hate to kill in the name of Islam.

Islamic radicalism is a serious threat and you have so many conflicts involving Muslims, irrespective if internal Muslim wars or against non-Muslims. Alternatively, you have so many terrorist threats and religious persecution of non-Muslims in mainly Muslim nations is a daily reality. Therefore, this issue is not only serious and of major importance but it is also a nightmare.

The reason it is a nightmare is because the current jihad is in reality the same jihad that Mohammed started in the 7th century. However, unlike the old jihad, Islamists have a free reign to propagate their war throughout all societies because of the liberal nature of many non-Muslim societies.

Therefore, religious leaders like Abu Bakar Ba’asyir are dangerous but you have many hidden leaders keeping quiet but with the same aim, however, they desire the same aim but by being more astute and obtaining Islamization by stealth.

LEE JAY WALKER

http://www.leejaywalker.wordpress.com

leejayteach@hotmail.com

http://www.theseoultimes.com

http://www.leejay13.wordpress.com