News, Views and Reviews: Sid Harth — WordPress.

[navanavonmilita]

News, Views and Reviews: Sid Harth — WordPress.
http://cogitoergosum.co.cc/2010/08/11/tools-%e2%80%b9-news-views-and-reviews-sid-harth-%e2%80%94-wordpress/

Surprie,Surprise!: Sid Harth

I am getting tired of my current Avatar. “navanavonmilita” Sanskrit
for newly bloomed (flower, like a rose, a diaisy, a water lily, a
sunflower, a desert cactus bloom that blooms once in a twenty five
years when there is a fool moon under the skies full of stars, and
such poetic notions.

I am reincarnating myself to a new and much improved Avatar.

“cogito ergo sum.” Latin for “I think, Therefore I am.”

Truely, I think. Otherwise why would world care to read my various and
sundry posts in my blogs?

I have many blogs as I have many “Nome de Plume.” french for pen
mnames. Some were cute, others were clever and some just dumb.

One of my pen name was, toungue in cheek, style, “godotcom.”

As the dotcom ventures collapse so did my Avatar.

For some time, I used to like another cute version, “tikakar,” marathi
for a critic. It got quite a reception among California computer
coolies. They, at that time were in charge of Dejavue’s discussion
groups. As a matter of fact in those heady days everyone who was
anyone near a university computer terminal jumped on the idea to have
discussion groups related to their specific cultures.
Inthe beginning, the groups were formed on country basis. Afterwards
when it became very crowded with SPAM postings, vulgar language and
postings of vulgar pictures, it broke into several regional groups of
the original parent country.

India group divided into Either state groups and/or linguistic groups.

We had marathi, Kannada, Tamil, Telugu, Bengali and Gujarati groups.

North India’s Hindi speaking states decided to have their states and
chose to have groups like Rajasthan, Bihar, Punjab. They also had sub
groups like, Jammu-Kashmir.

Crossposting was unlimited and allowed. That means one could post in
one group and crosspost thesame message across a statelines and/or
countrylines.

This division did not suit some of the diehards. They, then broke away
and formed separate groups for religion, regional music, regional
issues and such.

Ultimately, this separation was found to be lacking a fresh thinking.
Some preferred moderated versions. Telugus wanted nothing to do with
Indian cultural issues. They prospered for a little while and died a
natural death soon.

Moderation device was a cumbersome process. One self elected person
would scutinize all the posts and use his own judgment as to what was
right and proper for that group. he had an agenda, most of the time.
That meant he could use his authority to kill some of the best posts
and nobody knew about his deeds.

Whatever they say about India, it is so vile a place that any
semblance of unity, as proclaimed by some jingoist, falls short of
reality.

I spent half my life in the good old USA. When four people from India
find themselves living in a city, as big as, say Chicago, New York and
San Fransisco, accidentally, they form a society.

This group sticks together for some time happily not minding their
differences.

Just as an example of this group, I cite my personal experience.

I, a marathi from Bombay meets a Sikh from Ludhiana. We become
friends. Sometime later, we find a Gujarati fellow and he joins group.
Now we are three happy Indians having a good time. later a Bengali
joins a group and we are, now, a foursome.

Just an example.

When a Pakistani Punjabi joins our group, our dear Sikh friend
resigns. When another Gujarati person arrives, our Gujarati member and
the newcomer resign and form their Gujarati association.

The process goes on and on till, your’s truly finds himself alone.

It is lonely at the top. Arn’t their more Marathi people? Yes. Most
certainly. They have their separate associations based upon their
region and or their profession, religion or their own kinds of diets.

Brahmins have nothing to do with meat eating marathas and fish eating
Saraswats and Goans, even when they speak the same language.

Jains have nothing to to with meat eating, fish eating and onions and
garlic eating marathi crowd.

I told you, Indians are a bunch of crazies.

So be it. Who needs them?

http:cogitoergosum.co.cc

…and I am Sid harth

i
1 Votes

By navanavonmilita, on 11/08/2010 at 8:50 pm, under News, Views and
Reviews. . No Comments
Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. Edit

[and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)]

Shariah, the Threat to America

The Editor
Family Security Matters
Wednesday, September 15, 2010

A report (pdf) has just been published by the Center for Security
Policy, which should be taken seriously by anyone with an interest in
national security issues, and particularly those in government. The
report has been written by "TEAM B", a panel of 19 people, headed by
Lieutenant General William G. "Jerry" Boykin and Lieutenant General
Harry Edward Soyster. From 2003 to 2007 Boykin was Deputy
Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, and Soyster was a former
Director of Defense Intelligence Agency and Commanding General at
U.S. Intelligence and Security Command.

The 17 associates in the report include Maj. Stephen C. Coughlin
(ret.), Andrew McCarthy, Ambassador Henry Cooper, Admiral James A.
"Ace" Lyons -- US Navy (Ret.), former Commander-in-Chief, Pacific
Fleet, John Guandolo—former Special Agent, Counter-Terrorism
Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, R. James Woolsey—former
Director of Central Intelligence and others.

The 177-page report itself is entitled: "Shariah, The Threat to
America, An exercise in competitive analysis." You can download it
here (pdf format).

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/docLib/20100915_Shariah-TheThreattoAmerica.pdf

The message is simple but strong. There may be some libertarian
interpretations of sharia law, such as that practiced by the late Gus
Dur, an Indonesian religious leader, where sharia is seen as a guide
to personal conduct. That interpretation of sharia is rare, however,
and more people and most Muslim nations respect the other end of the
sharia spectrum. This shade of sharia is connected with Islamic
supremacists (Islamists) who are directly opposed to all of the
liberties and democracy that could only have grown in the
Enlightenment and later. The Enlightenment values that inspired and
informed the Founding Fathers to create America, which epitomises
Western Democracy, are the antithesis of the extremist -- Islamist --
side of sharia.

Even Tony Blair, who had allowed his government's policies to be
dictated by Islamist followers of Maududi and the Muslim Brotherhood,
recently stated that Radical Islam is the world's greatest threat.

The Team B report states:

What cannot credibly be denied, however, is that:

a. shariah is firmly rooted in Islam's doctrinal texts, and it is
favored by influential Islamic commentators, institutions, and
academic centers (for example, the faculty at al-Azhar University in
Cairo, for centuries the seat of Sunni learning and jurisprudence);

b. shariah has been, for over a half-century, lavishly financed
and propagated by Islamic regimes (particularly Saudi Arabia and
Iran), through the offices of disciplined international organizations
(particularly the Muslim Brotherhood); and

c. due to the fact that Islam lacks a central, universally
recognized hierarchical authority (in contrast to, say, the Roman
Catholic papacy), authentic Islamic moderates and reformers have an
incredibly difficult task in endeavoring to delegitimize shariah in
the community where it matters most: the world's Muslims.

The report demands that genuine moderate Muslims and Islamic
reformers must be encouraged, for without them, the hardline
"Islamist" ideology will prevail.

Chapter 4 deals specifically with the Muslim Brotherhood, and other
subsections of Chapter 5 deal with Hamas, al-Qaeda, Khomeinism,
Hezbollah, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Tablighi Jamaat and Jamaat al-Fuqra.

For too long, governments in the West, including those in America,
have taken on board a fictional version of Islam, a myth. This has
allowed (p.17 of the report) individuals like Abdurahman Alamoudi to
be an adviser at the White House, even though this Muslim Brotherhood
member supported terrorist groups and was himself subsequently jailed
for 23 years for terrorist offenses.

Alamoudi had claimed in 1996, at the time that he was nominating and
vetting chaplains for the U.S. military and prisons, that: "either we
do it now or we do it after a hundred years, but this country will
become a Muslim country."

Other people who have masqueraded as "moderates" and have had the ear
of government in America have had the same attitudes. Omar Ahmad,
founder of CAIR had stated in 1998 that:

"If you choose to live here [in America]… you have a responsibility
to deliver the message of Islam. Islam isn't in America to be equal
to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the
highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on
earth."

While a fictional interpretation of Islam is used to filter the
reality of the Muslim world and its undercurrents, the West and
America in particular will be compromised and ultimately overthrown.
The report is a sourcebook that lists and defines most of the major
global Islamist movements and showing how they operate upon a strict
interpretation of the laws and rules of sharia. Interpreted in this
literalist fashion, sharia makes Islam into a political ideology and
literalist interpretations of sharia must be accepted for what they
are -- they divide the world into two halves -- Dar-ul Islam (the
House of Islam) and Dar-ul Harb (the House of War). Infidels reside
in the House of War and strict radical interpretation of Sharia
dictates that the House of War must be fought until the entire world
is within the House of Islam.

Chapter 8 of the report (p.133) states:

In fact, by manipulating perceptions at the national strategic level
about the nature of shariah, the enemy can actually exercise profound
influence over the nature and adequacy of the defense mounted. That
is most especially true of actions needed to contend with the Muslim
Brotherhood's stealth jihad -- even though we know its avowed purpose
is aimed at "eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from
within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands."

To fully understand America's peril in the face of such enemies, we
must carefully consider our collective failure to contend with their
successful pursuit of information dominance and psychological
strategy, critical ingredients in information warfare. We must come
to grips with, and correct, the control they have come to enjoy over
what Americans, and most especially the U.S. civilian, intelligence,
and military leadership, understand about shariah and its proponents.

America is at a crossroads, and the current administration -- most
notably the president and John Brennan -- feature strongly within the
report, and their refusal to acknowledge a Global Jihad is seen as
potentially dangerous. The current administration has a need for a
"wake-up call."

However, this is not just a problem with one administration --
previous governments have made the same errors, but the media and
others are faulted for their "dhimmi" (appeasing, submissive)
attitudes. Chapter 7 of the report Page 129 states:

It is easy to see why dhimmi populations in Islamic lands would
collude in "protecting" Islam from "offense" or criticism; they
rightly and understandably fear the consequences under shariah. But
why do Westerners, in academia, the media, the White House, or the
United Nations collude in these same "protections"?

For that matter, why the reluctance to acknowledge patent differences
between shariah and the West? Why the refusal to examine whether
shariah plays a central role in the so-called "war on terror" -- now
even more euphemistically known as a fight against "extremism"? Why
the failure to study whether the "war on terror" is a defensive
response to the latest manifestation of 13 centuries of jihad? Why
the cold-sweating fear over even asking the questions?

Bat Ye'or has described Western silence on Islam -- today's gruesome
human rights violations, yesterday's bloody conquests -- as "the
politics of dhimmitude." The term is provocative, describing a
framework of concessions to Islam that goes far beyond multicultural
theorizing in a lecture hall or PC politesse in the public arena.

This is an important document, and one that I will download for my
own future reference. I hope that our regular readers will also
download it and take the time to read it. Everyone needs to know the
truth.

Unfortunately, one group of people that denies the truths within this
document -- the current administration -- is the group that really
needs to read it, but will probably look away....

The Editor, Family Security Matters
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/id.172/author_detail.asp

More at:
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.7376/pub_detail.asp

Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti

o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.

Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.