Muslims Are Their Own Worst Enemy

There are millions of Muslims allover the world but they are powerless. Divisions among Muslims, especially between Sunni and Shiite's, have consigned the Muslim Middle East to almost a century of Western control. Recently the Islamic Solidarity Games, a regional version of the Olympics, which was supposed to be held in April in Iran, have been cancelled, because of disparity between Iranians and the Arabs whether to call the body of water the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Gulf.

Muslim disunity has made it possible for Israel to dispossess the Palestinians, for the U.S. to invade Iraq, and for the U.S. to rule much of the region through puppets. For example, in exchange for faithful service, Egypt receives $1.5 billion a year from Washington, which enables President Mubarak to buy off opposition. The opposition had rather have the money than support the Palestinians. Therefore, Egypt cooperates with Israel and the U.S. in the blockade of Gaza.

Another factor is the willingness of some Muslims to betray their own kind for U.S. dollars. Kenneth Timmerman, head of the Foundation for Democracy, which describes itself as

“a private, non-profit organization established in 1995 with grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to promote democracy and internationally-recognized standards of human rights in Iran.”

Just prior to the sudden appearance of a “green revolution” in Tehran primed to protest an election, Timmerman wrote that

“the National Endowment for Democracy has spent millions of dollars during the past decade promoting ‘color’ revolutions in places such as Ukraine and Serbia, training political workers in modern communications and organizational techniques. Some of that money appears to have made it into the hands of pro-Mousavi groups, who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds .”

So, according to the Timmerman, funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, it was U.S. money that funded Mousavi’s claims that Ahmadinejad stole the last Iranian election. The Washington Post reported in 2007 that Bush authorized spending more than $400 million for activities that included “supporting rebel groups opposed to the country’s ruling clerics.”

The U.S. installed puppet president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, is bought and paid for with U.S. dollars.

The money that Washington gives Karzai finances the corruption that supports him. Karzai’s corruption and his treason against the Afghan people encourage the Taliban to keep fighting in order to achieve a government that serves Afghans instead of Washington, D.C. Without the puppet Karzai selling out Afghans to Washington, the U.S. would have already been driven out of the country. With Karzai paying Afghans with American money to fight Afghans for the Americans, the war drones on into its ninth year.

Similarly. at Washington’s behest, the government of Pakistan is conducting war against its own people, killing many and forcing others to flee their homes and lands.

The Pakistani government’s war against its own citizens has caused military expenses to soar, putting Pakistan’s budget deep in the red. Deputy US Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin ordered the Pakistani government to raise taxes to pay for the war against its own people (*). The puppet ruler, Asif Ali Zardari, complied with his American master’s orders. Zardari declared a broad-based value added tax on virtually all goods and most services in Pakistan.

Similarly, Saudi Arabia is against Iran.

Saudi Arabia which is a predominantly Wahhabi society has always been skeptical about Shi’ite Iran’s activities in the Gulf region, thus labelling them as Iran’s strategy of gaining influence in not only the Middle East but also in the entire Muslim world. Leading Wahhabi and Shi’ite Clerics in both the countries deemed each other's religious beliefs as incorrect for decades. An attempt was made by the Wahabbis to demolish the shrine of al-Hussein, one of the important religious leaders of the Shi’ite theology. Since that incident, tension between the Wahhabi and Shi’ite creeds has increased and this tension is considered unlikely to be resolved any time soon.*

The “cakewalk war” in Iraq has lasted 7 years instead of the promised 6 weeks, and the violence is still ongoing with Iraqis killed and maimed nearly every day. The reason US soldiers are still in Iraq is because the Iraqis hate each other more than they hate the America.

The majority Shiite's regarded the American invasion of Iraq as an opportunity to gain power over the minority Sunnis, who ruled under Saddam Hussein. Therefore, the Shiite's never engaged the American invading forces. The minority Sunnis (20 percent of the population) gave most of their effort to fighting the Shi’ite majority, but in their spare time a few thousand Sunnis were able to inflict serious losses on the American superpower.

Finally realizing the power of lucre in the Arab world, the Americans put 80,000 Sunnis on the U.S. military payroll and paid them to stop killing Americans. This is how the U.S. won the war in Iraq. Iraqis sold out their independence for American dollars. Considering that a few thousand Sunnis were able to prevent superpower America from successfully occupying Baghdad or much of Iraq, had the Shiite's joined with the Sunnis against the invaders, the U.S. would have been defeated and driven out. This outcome was not possible, because the Shiite's wanted to settle the score with the Sunnis, who had ruled them under Saddam Hussein.

(S)

This is one of the reason that Iraq under the puppet Mailiki today is in ruins, with one million dead, four million displaced or homeless, and the professional class having fled the country. As long as Muslims hate and fear one another, they will remain a vanquished people.

Id be carefull what you say about muslims. They have very short tempers.

Radical forms of diversity is a threat to any established social or cultural order. Liberals disagree and don't think we can get enough diversity before we learn to import and export people like products across continents.

Shallow historical memory may be a vice, but short historical memory is probably worse. Go back a thousand years in European history and you will know why Europeans are wary of Islam. No, wait, you don't even have to go back that long. How about Yugoslavia? How about Kosovo? If you fail to understand the historical significance of Christian Serbs fighting against Muslim invaders to protect their land, and how it relates to the genocide we saw during the Yugoslavian collapse, you're likely not in the position of teaching history.

The gap between religious and non-religious people, America and Europe, is real. Yet both groups agree to preserve and uphold each respective Constitution. The kind of intolerance we're seeing within Islam in Europe is often not only openly defiant of basic Constitutional ideals like free speech--it wants harsh punishments for certain lifestyles. Many conservative Christians may not wish homosexuals to marry in their church. That's intolerant. But when we look at Islamic intolerance in Europe, we're not just talking about if homosexuals can marry in mosques or not. We're talking about civic rights in an open and free society. This is where Islamic intolerance has proven far more radical than any fringe Christian nut movement.

There is no turning back. Europe/America is pluralist today. We have to deal with the situation realistically, and hence adjust policies accordingly, which is what every New Right movement in Europe right now is fighting for. Diversity, strangely pleasing to liberals and leftists considering the complex problems it brings, is currently one of our greatest weaknesses, not strengths. In the end, historically, we have only seen genocide and tyranny rise out of radical diversity. The aftermath legacy of Yugoslavia, and the absolute ignorance of terror displayed by its rulers, should teach us a lesson.

Denial becomes a virtue in a culture divided by conflicting interests. Let's not repeat this mistake again, because if we do, a second, more unsettling question needs to be asked: Would the Americans be willing to bomb European capitals to end another series of genocides?

reply to post by December_Rain


I'd say the major problem was the west meddling in their affairs to secure their natural resources. That has been going on for a century. Throw into that the west's creation of the state of Israel on their land, and the problems get worse.

The Sunni/Shiite split isn't the cause of the issue. Loads of Muslims living where there is loads of oil definitely is.

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
Id be carefull what you say about muslims. They have very short tempers.

I couldn't care less about what other people would feel because I am not insulting anyone's religion or race. I don't ever do that. What I stated in OP is true in respect to the condition of ME.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by December_Rain

 

I'd say the major problem was the west meddling in their affairs to secure their natural resources. That has been going on for a century. Throw into that the west's creation of the state of Israel on their land, and the problems get worse. The Sunni/Shiite split isn't the cause of the issue. Loads of Muslims living where there is loads of oil definitely is.

Agree with you but even then the people living there cannot be discredited from the fault. If they wouldn't have allowed themselves to be setup we wouldn't have had this problem in ME today.

reply to post by December_Rain


"If they wouldn't have allowed themselves to be setup"?? It wasn't all Muslims who were complicit - you are making some fantastically inaccurate generalisations.

reply to post by davesidious


No I am not, I exactly mentioned in OP who am I speaking about. For eg. The rulers of Saudi Arabia, Egypt prime minister, Afghanistan and Iraq Govt. etc.

Generalizations are deceiving. You can as easily say that Christians are their own worst enemy.

We could perhaps deduce from "muslims being their own worst enemy "that they are a tad more less ambitious than their rivals when it come to world domination ect.

The alternative reason is they are quarrelsome group.

I just wish we could all just say brother let God unite us , for we are all his creation.

Muslim,Christian, chosen few, confuscian, Hindu, Buddhist, Athiest, Agnostic,Pagan, Wikka,Mormon,Scientologist,all claiming the divine path.
All kill in the name of their God.
That is why you know they are all false.

The state of Israel being created whether you believe for the right or wrong reasons has done one impartial thing for the world at least and has proved a point.

A unified middle eastern caliphate would just be bad news for the world yet again until they learn to grow up.

Although the situation is far from perfect now with wars in parts of the ME and probably never will be until both sides East and West grow up, it's better than the whole of the ME deciding it's time to expand the Dar al-Islam completely.


[edit on 20-3-2010 by SR]

Source check- Kenneth Timmerman is a complete and utter hack. The National Endowment for Democracy is little more than his own imagined organization to make him sound credible (IMO).
He is a Neo-con of the highest order and heavily affiliated with the Zionist agenda. He still stands by the position that Saddam possessed nuclear weapons. I heard him speak at my university to a crowd of about 20 of which about half were opposed to his message while the others mostly comprised the Zionist Jewish group that sponsored the event. During that speech he actually referred to Muslim women as "bags" referring to their dress.
While his expertise in Middle Eastern politics is extensive it is quite hostile to Islam.