Koran Jihad and Advanced Dhimmitude

by: Diana West

Two more American troops murdered today in Afghanistan as the UN joins forces with Karzai and the Koran Jihad by calling for “disciplinary action” against the soldiers who disposed of Korans last month.

In other words, the dhimmi of the world are uniting to turn the Islamic screws on the USA. And the USA has absolutely no clue what is happening.

From Reuters:

    The United Nations joined Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Thursday in calling on the U.S. military to take disciplinary action against those who burned copies of the Koran at a NATO air base, calling the incident a “grave mistake”.

    Despite an apology from U.S. President Barack Obama, the burning of the Muslim holy book at the Bagram base north of the capital ignited a wave of anti-Western fury across the country.

    At least 30 people were killed in protests, including two American soldiers who were killed by an Afghan soldier who joined the demonstrations.

By my count, at least six Americans have been killed in this latest eruption of violent jihad.

    “After the first step of a profound apology, there must be a second step … of disciplinary action,” Jan Kubis, special representative for the U.N. secretary-general in Afghanistan, told a news conference.

    “Only after this, after such a disciplinary action, can the international forces say ‘yes, we’re sincere in our apology’,” added Kubis, without elaborating on what action should be taken.

    Obama, in a letter of apology to Karzai last week, said the burning of copies of the Koran had been “inadvertent” and an “error”.

    Distancing the United Nations from the anti-Western uproar, Kubis lamented the attack on a U.N. compound in Kunduz province in the north last week, which angry demonstrators charged with weapons. U.N. staff was relocated around the country.

    “We were not the ones who desecrated the holy Koran,” Kubis said. “We deeply, deeply, profoundly respect Islam.”

I don’t know if that cuts it. Shouldn’t Kubis have said the UN “deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, profoundly, profoundly” respects Islam?

    In some of the toughest language yet from an international organization over the Koran burnings, Kubis added:

    “We were very hurt that the international military allowed the desecration of the Koran. We rejected and condemned this act, it doesn’t matter that it was a mistake.”.

Behold what is perhaps the most advanced state of dhimmitude. Here we  see the dhimmi — Jan Kubis and the UN hierarchy — mimic perfectly the perpetual aggrievement of Islam. Islam’s aggrievenment becomes their own aggrievment, indeed, becomes even more important than any by now atavistic concept of Western justice and reason, as they draw power from the obviously more kinetic Islamic position. Because this whole affair is, and must be understood as, a barely concealed power play. It is a power play thinly disguised by the Islamic pose of victimhood. Such feigned victimhood becomes a trap for the ” perpetrator” of the perceived aggrievement — in this case, the US military. Falling for the trap, as we in the West do time and time again, means accepting these intemperate, immoral and murderous manifestations of Islamic dementia in the same way that a “co-dependent” family member accepts and accommodates a mentally sick relative’s manifestations of dementia in the home in order to create or preserve some measure of family peace or quiet; in order to stop the outburst, to tamp down the rage and violence, to make it all better — even if “better” is always just a lull before the next demented power play.

And so the co-dependent USA attempts to assuage this latest Islamic outburst by taking an array of co-dependent steps that come under the rubric of apology, of restitution, of making it all “better.” Just as such actions bring a co-dependent family member more closely into the behavioral orbit of the sick family member, they also bring the US more closely into the behavioral Islamic orbit — the orbit regulated by Islamic law. It forces the “perpetrator” into accepting the sacredness of an inanimate object; it forces the “perpetrator” into accepting the Islamic position that a  Christian or Jew is unfit (unclean) to dispose of the sacred thing without desecretating it. It forces the “perpetrator” to accept the Islamic belief that such “desecration” consitutes a crime of capital proportions.

It forces the “perpetrator” to act Islamic.

    The call from the U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan for action come after Karzai demanded the Koran burners — whom he said were American soldiers — be put on public trial and punished.

    NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) says any disciplinary action “deemed necessary” would be taken by U.S. authorities after a thorough review of the facts in an investigation.

    Results from separate investigations by NATO and Afghan authorities into the Koran burnings last month are expected soon. New protests could erupt if the investigation teams are seen as too soft on the Koran burners.

Islamic blackmail which we may expect to be justified and celebrated by dhimmi such as Jan Kubis.

    The Koran desecrations are also believed to have spurred a 25-year-old policeman to kill two high-ranking American officers inside the Interior Ministry.

    The attack has raised questions about NATO’s strategy of replacing large combat unit with advisers as the alliance tries to wind down the war.

How about American janissaries?

March 2, 2012 | 5 Comments »

Leave a Reply

5 Comments / 5 Comments

  1. Although many the time when I have disagreed with Yamit, this time I fully concur with him. The US and other Western forces have no real business being there when, no matter what their reasons are, they can not win the hearts of these savages. I believe that those who really understand Islamist know that when they feel that they are harmed in any way, revenge is not rhetoric but factual. What ever we give them means nothing. A very quick withdrawal is needed to bring our troops home. Another war is in the offering, Iran, the true head of the snake. A smart war would be primarily an air war, leaving Iran devastated in the areas of nuclear, naval, air, land and infrastructure. Expensive, but cheap without boots on the ground.

  2. Didn’t expect you Yamit, to be an apologist for jihad savagery.

    I’m not an apologist for any diaper-head. If you knew anything about Muslim cultures and most 3rd world cultures, you would know that the masses are easily manipulated. In this case I’m not convinced that the attacks against Americans are about the Koran burning although that was used as an excuse and justification in their minds to attack a foreign invader. To many if not most Afghans America is not just an infidel nation they are an Imperialist Infidel invader of their homeland. No different than the Russians, British, Mongols and Persians.

    There is not a family in Afghanistan that has not lost family members to America. I feel for the American servicemen who were killed and wounded but I also believe America should not be there and the servicemen as far as all American governments are just fodder to be expended for the greater good of securing oil from the landlocked FSR’s. American oil companies want that oil and Afghanistan is the best route unless you want to go through Iran or Russia? To build such pipelines America needs a friendly stable authority running Afghanistan and this is what the war has always been about.

  3. Didn’t expect you Yamit, to be an apologist for jihad savagery. There is no justification for going on a murderous rampage over a book. Those korans btw, which were desecrated by the jihadis themselves who wrote terrorist plans in them. And yes, the Afghan regime owes America an apology for the murder of our troops by rampaging mobs and those Afghan police purportedly fighting on “our side”. Of course we should be aware by now that muslims will never actually be on our side, because we are infidels.

  5. A commentator on Fox News yesterday lamented that the Afgani’s were unappreciative of all America has done for them, And couldn’t understand why the leadership has not apologized to America for the murder of Americans.

    First of all I don’t think anyone in Afganhistan asked the Americans to invade their country destroy most of what little modern infrastructure existed and killed and murdered tens of thousands of their countrymen. The Taliban other than being fanatical Muslims were never an existential threat to America before or after the American invasion and if anything an American creation.

    They were the enemies of Shia Iran and did block Iranian hegemony in that part of central Asia. Americas record of nation building is Zero successes

    In all of History the Afgan’s have never been defeated by invading Empires and why stupid-arrogant Americans thought they were better and would succeed where all other failed is beyond rational comprehension.

    I feel for American servicemen killed but then they had a choice of not being there. They volunteered and accepted the risk of all soldiers. The pity is they died for no good reason except enriching vested interests in America…OIL!

    It’s all about oil

    Romancing the Taliban

    As the Russians withdrew from Afghanistan in early 1989, American policymakers celebrated with champagne, while the country itself collapsed into virtual anarchy. Almost a quarter of the population was living in refugee camps and most of the country was in ruins. Different factions of the mujahideen struggled for power in the countryside, while the government of Muhammed Najibullah, the last Soviet-installed president controlled Kabul. Eventually, in April 1992, Kabul fell to some of the mujahideen factions and Burhannudin Rabbani was de dared president, but civil war continued unabated. Hekmatyar in particular was dissatisfied with the new distribution 0 power. With his huge stock of U.S.-supplied weapons, h began an artillery and rocket assault on Kabul that lasted for almost three years, even after he was appointed prime minister in 1993. “The barrage…killed more than 10,000 Afghans [drove] hundreds of thousands into squalid refugee camps, created political chaos, and blocked millions of exiles from returning.” The rest of the country disintegrated into isolated fiefdoms dominated by local warlords.

    In 1994, a new group, the Taliban (Pashtun for “students”), emerged on the scene. Its members came from madrassas set up by the Pakistani government along the border and funded by the U.S., Britain, and the Saudis, where they had received theological indoctrination and military training. Thousands of young men-refugees and orphans from the war in Afghanistan-became the foot soldiers of this movement:

    These boys were from a generation who had never seen their country at peace-an Afghanistan not at war with invaders and itself. They had no memories of their tribes, their elders, their neighbors nor the complex ethnic mix of peoples that made up their villages and their homeland. These boys were what the war had thrown up like the sea’s surrender on the beach of history …

    They were literally the orphans of war, the rootless and restless, the jobless and the economically deprived with little self-knowledge. They admired war because it was the only occupation they could possibly adapt to. Their simple belief in a messianic, puritan Islam which had been drummed into them by simple village mullahs was the only prop they could hold on to and which gave their lives some meaning. Untrained for anything, even the traditional occupations of their forefathers such as farming, herding or the making of handicrafts, they were what Karl Marx would have termed Afghanistan’s lumpen proletariat.

    With the aid of the Pakistani army, the Taliban swept across most of the exhausted country promising a restoration of order and finally capturing Kabul in September 1996.

    When the Taliban took power, State Department spokesperson Glyn Davies said that he saw “nothing objectionable” in the Taliban’s plans to impose strict Islamic law, and Senator Hank Brown, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Near East and South Asia, welcomed the new regime: “The good part of what has happened is that one of the factions at last seems capable of developing a new government in Afghanistan.” “The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis. There will be Aramco [the consortium of oil companies that controlled Saudi oil], pipelines, an emir, no parliament and lots of Sharia law. We can live with that,” said another U.S. diplomat in 1997.

    The reference to oil and pipelines explains everything. Since the collapse of the USSR at the end of 1991, U.S. oil companies and their friends in the State Department have been salivating at the prospect of gaining access to the huge oil and natural gas reserves in the former Soviet republics bordering the Caspian Sea and in Central Asia. These have been estimated as worth $4 trillion. The American Petroleum Institute calls the Caspian region “the area of greatest resource potential outside of the Middle East.” And while he was still CEO of Halliburton, the world’s biggest oil services company, Vice President Dick Cheney told other industry executives, “I can’t think of a time when we’ve had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian.” The struggle to control these stupendous resources has given rise to what Rashid has dubbed the “new Great Game,” pitting shifting alliances of governments and oil and gas consortia against one another.

    Afghanistan itself has no known oil or gas reserves, but it is an attractive route for pipelines leading to Pakistan, India, and the Arabian Sea. In the mid-1990s, a consortium led by the California-based Unocal Corporation proposed a $4.5 billion oil and gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan. But this would require a stable central government in Afghanistan itself. Thus began several years in which U.S. policy in the region centered on “romancing the Taliban.” According to one report

    ,

    Read More from Live Leak