The Mother Of All Strikes….A Very Real Possibility…To Be Unleashed Against Iran…Adina Kutnicki

This writer never laid claim to military expertise – far from it – however, yours truly does claim to be closely connected to those who have such strategic resumes, as well as relevant ‘work’ experience.

Therefore, when approached ( on many occasions ) by folks with the question : what is your considered opinion, regarding how a pre-emptive strike will unfold, the first response has been – a devastating EMP attack, followed up by Jericho 111 missile strikes.

So sayeth said contacts. Who am I to argue?

Thus, it came as no surprise to read the following at a very on target site – ‘Is Israel Planning EMP Attack On Iran?’

“WASHINGTON – Analysts say because Israel now believes diplomacy has failed to halt Iran’s nuclear program and the Jewish state’s very survival is at stake, Israelis have not ruled out a Jericho III missile launch to detonate a single electromagnetic pulse warhead at high altitude over central Iran.”

“The assessment is underscored by recent comments from Israeli officials that the Islamic republic is reaching its “zone of immunity” from conventional military attack on its nuclear sites.”

“In addition, analysts point out the use of long-range aircraft with refueling capability would be highly complex and pose many logistical problems. Israel also probably would not be allowed overflight permission from Turkey, Iraq or Saudi Arabia to reach its Iranian targets. Further, such an approach would minimize any element of surprise.”

“Meanwhile, top religious and political officials in Iran have issued repeated warnings they plan to obliterate the Jewish state.”

“Israel has made an assessment that Iran is on the threshold of a breakthrough to make a nuclear weapon. However,  some national security experts, including some in the United States, believe Iran is several years away from making such a device. And they say actual weaponization – the ability to miniaturize a nuclear bomb to fit on its nuclear-capable missiles – still is further off.”

“Debate over just how close Iran may be to making a nuclear weapon has raised the issue of the quality of the intelligence to back Israeli claims. Sources point to the example of the intelligence used to assess Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction that prompted the U.S. to attack Iraq in March 2003.”

“With Iran continuing its enrichment program, however, Israel and some Western countries are concerned that the amount of low-level uranium it has enriched could be enriched further to some 90 percent purity – which is what is required to make nuclear weapons.”

“U.S. officials don’t assess that Iran has reached that point.”

“Given that Iranian sites may be hardened against a conventional military attack, several Israeli and foreign sources believe that Israel has a nuclear device to create an electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, that would produce little radiation on the ground but could knock out all of Iran’s electronics.”

“Israel also is assessed to be able to launch nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles from its German-supplied Dolphin electric submarines that could carry a one-kiloton or more device and explode over Iran, effectively neutralizing all of Iran’s electronics.”

“This would include Iran’s command and control capabilities and its ability to launch ballistic missiles in retaliation to a pre-emptive Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, which Western intelligence has assessed is a cover to make nuclear weapons.”

“Sources say that an Israeli EMP attack also would effectively halt Iran’s ability to launch its forces to block the Strait of Hormuz, which the Islamic republic has threatened to do if it is attacked, along with targeting a number of U.S. military facilities in the region, as well as Israel.”

“An electromagnetic pulse occurs following a nuclear weapon exploded at a high altitude, creating a very strong electrical field that can overwhelm all electronics, knocking out or seriously damaging any electronic devices connected to power sources or antennas, including communications equipment, computers, electrical appliances, automobile and aircraft ignitions systems. Experts say it also can adversely affect a person’s implanted heart pacemaker device.”

“The effect from an EMP would be very similar to electronics in a near lightning strike or a solar storm which also can affect electronics but on a lesser scale than a pulse from a high-altitude nuclear explosion.”

“Another scenario discussed among some Israeli leaders is the detonation of an EMP over the entire Middle East, including Israel, whose military infrastructure has been hardened against such attacks. This would allow Israel to fly its jets directly to Iran without concerns about detection. Though it would also turn out the lights in Israel, sources there say the Jewish state could bring power back for civilians in a matter of days. A detonation at an altitude of up to 250 miles not only would affect all electronics in Iran but could damage electrical systems from the Middle East and much of Europe, these experts add. Such an EMP event also would dramatically affect all U.S. military facilities in the region.”

“An EMP attack on the United States, for example, from a 30-kiloton nuclear weapon exploded at an altitude of 62 miles, or 100 kilometers, effectively would knock out 70 percent of electrical systems up to a thousand miles in every direction. A similar explosion at a higher altitude of some 250 miles would virtually affect all electronics from Boston to Los Angeles and from Chicago to New Orleans, according to experts.”

“Consequently, a detonation limited to Iran would have to be at a much lower altitude to avoid such far-ranging effects on the electronics in the region and beyond.”

“According to U.S. intelligence sources, Israel not only possesses nuclear devices of one kiloton or more which would be sufficient to create an effective result from an electromagnetic pulse but has Jericho III missiles which it tested in 2009 capable of carrying nuclear payloads some 2,500 miles. The distance between Israel and Iran is approximately 1,000 miles.”

“U.S. sources knowledgeable about ways to “harden” buildings and other facilities against an EMP attack say business in this area has been booming throughout the Middle East for months.”

“In recent weeks, U.S. intelligence officials have told WND/G2Bulletin that they have detected Israel handling propellants for its Jericho missiles.”

“The prospect that Israel has this capability was first made known by an ex-CIA case officer, Chet Nagle, at a Capitol Hill EMPact America press conference held in Washington, D.C., in November 2011.”

A similar prospect was outlined in a Nov. 10, 2011, Front Page Magazine article, “Connecting the Nuclear Dots on Iran,” written by Kenneth Timmerman who is the president of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran and maintains close ties with the Iranian opposition.”

“Any Israeli attack on Iran is sure to make of Israel an international pariah, Nagle argues,” Timmerman said in quoting Nagle in a conversation. “Plus, the likelihood of success – that is, in destroying or disabling all of Iran’s nuclear weapons capabilities (by conventional means) so they have nothing to launch on the morning after the attack – is low.”

“If you’re going to go to all that trouble and be a pariah,” Timmerman quoted Nagel as saying in their conversation, “why not take one of those Jericho missiles, and detonate it 300 miles above the surface and deliver an EMP strike on Iran? That would stop their clock – if it’s electric – as well as all those centrifuges and everything else. Then the Greens can take over the country and we can go back in and rebuild the grid.”

“The prospect for this doomsday approach has arisen due to a comment made by Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak last February that Iran was entering a “zone of immunity” from military attack. Other officials in recent days have suggested that such a “zone of immunity” will be reached before the end of the year.”

“The world, including the current U.S. administration, understands and accepts that Israel necessarily views the threat differently than they do, and that ultimately, Israel is responsible for taking the decisions related to its future, its security and its destiny,” Barak said.

“Given that this “zone of immunity” could be reached before the end of the year, there has been increasing speculation in recent days that Israel may launch an attack prior to the U.S. presidential elections in an effort to force the U.S. to act. Sources say that the Israelis have assessed that if President Obama is re-elected, he may want to continue down the path of negotiating with the Iranians.”

“The sources add that by attacking prior to the U.S. elections in November, the U.S. then will have no choice but to back Israel due to the U.S. commitment to ensure Israel’s security. They add that it also will help Obama’s re-election efforts.”

“Iran, however, insists that its nuclear development program is for peaceful purposes as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Under the terms of the NPT, Iran has the “right” to enrich uranium as it is doing. Iran has enriched up to 20 percent, which is more than enough for refueling its nuclear reactors but is considered an acceptable level for medical research.”

“As early as 2005, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued a fatwa, or religious decree, that is a legal pronouncement in Islam, that the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that the Islamic republic “shall never acquire these weapons.” Last February, Khamenei reiterated his 2005 fatwa.”

“The Iranian nation has never pursued and will never pursue nuclear weapons,” he said. “There is no doubt that the decision makers in the countries opposing us know well that Iran is not after nuclear weapons because the Islamic republic, logically, religiously and theoretically, considers the possession of nuclear weapons a grave sin and believes the proliferation of such weapons is senseless, destructive and dangerous.”

“Sources say that the edict from Khamenei is considered more than a fatwa, given that he not only is an ayatollah but also the supreme leader of Iran. For that reason, what he said is considered a hukm, or decree of the Supreme Jurisprudent, or Vali-yi Faqih, that determines the legal framework of the Islamic republic in accordance with Islamic law.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/is-israel-planning-emp-attack-on-iran/ .

Never being a betting sort, this time I will wager the following prediction – said scenario will take place before the elections.

Lights out…Iranian Hitler.

And, to our ‘holy warriors’ – G-d speed!!

The Paradox & Pitfalls of Liberal Democracies, In A time Of (im)Moral Relativism: The Havoc Wrought By Leftist Academia…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Let this writer set the record straight from the onset – the utmost respect for higher education is definitely in play. For if this was not the case, would expending a veritable fortune to educate one’s progeny at two of the highest esteemed institutions in the world – MIT and Caltech – make sense ? Of course not.

Hardly a genius, but certainly not dense nor fool hardly.

And, herein lies the paradox.

On a micro/personal level, what tack does a parent take when they intuit that the western academy has become little more than a cesspool of (im)moral relativism, and, by extension, (mental) boot camps in the process? Intrinsically, parents must be prepared to honestly ask themselves: can their (dear) offspring withstand the process of leftist indoctrination? This is not an easy question, but it mandates an honest assessment.

Too much is at stake.

And while the sciences/engineering disciplines are (still) relatively safe from the left’s grasping clutches, the same dare not be said of the social sciences/humanities.

Why is this important?

On a macro/societal level, the damage wrought by leftist academics is incalculable, so much so, western civilization hangs in the balance.

NO kidding around.

As such, this site has attempted to bring the above issue to the fore — from several seemingly diverging, yet, ultimately converging directions. In fact, several op-eds have addressed its import and impact.

Specifically, ‘Post-Zionist Academics Further Israel’s Delegitimization’ was featured at The Jewish Press, as a maiden attempt to raise the clarion call within Israel – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/06/22/post-zionist-academics-further-israels-delegitimization/. Part of the effort includes working with leading political scientists Dr. Martin Sherman and Professor Paul Eidelberg — primarily, revolving around beating back the deleterious effects described above.

Similarly, ‘Leftist Dogma The Same World Over … Freedom Loving People, Beware’ attempts to connect the leftist dots, regardless of where it embeds itself – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/01/leftist-dogma-the-same-world-over-freedom-loving-people-beware-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki-32-2/.

‘When Intellectual Honesty Smacks Up Against Leftist Delusions…A Nation-Saving Prescription To Beat Them Back’ demonstrates, in absolute terms, the havoc leftists heaped – and continue to – upon the Jewish nation – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/10/when-intellectual-honesty-smacks-up-against-leftist-delusions-a-nation-saving-prescription-to-beat-them-back-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki-84/.

Once again, ‘When Leftists, Mega-Rich, ‘Peace’ Obsessed Instigators Get Involved…What Can Go Wrong?’ spells out a catastrophe of their (leftist) making – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/22/when-leftist-mega-rich-peace-obsessed-instigators-get-involved-what-can-go-wrong-everything-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki-111.

To make matters clearer – at least on a psychological level – ‘Leftism…Lethal To Jews & Their Overall Health…Others Too’ demonstrates how their ‘religious’ devotion to leftist ideology kills – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/08/leftism-lethal-to-jews-their-overall-health-others-too-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/.

And, ‘What Happens When Resident Leftists/Peace Fantasists Hold The Reins Of Power…Regardless of Which Party Holds Sway’ allows the reader to clearly see the demonstrable repercussions of leftist hegemony – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/04/what-happens-when-resident-leftistspeace-fantasists-hold-the-reins-of-power-regardless-of-which-party-is-in-power-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/ .

Last, but not least, is an academic exercise on Israeli politics, explaining why Israel is where it is via ‘The Paradox Of Israeli Politics:Vote Right, Get Left’ http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/the_paradox_of_israeli_politics_vote_right_get_left.html.

Enter … esteemed Professor Paul Eidelberg  (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Eidelberg ) and his sage wisdom:‘ The Crisis of Our Times:Connecting The Dots’

The Crisis of Our Times: Connecting The Dots

Prof. Paul Eidelberg, President

Israel–America Renaissance Institute

Part I. Introduction

Will Israel or the United States strike Iran before it deploys ballistic tipped nuclear weapons? Why this belated question? Why has America, the most powerful nation in the world, refrained from launching a preemptive strike against a regime whose president has the audacity to scream “Death to America”? Given the deadly attacks on American forces by Iranian proxies in the past, should the malediction by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad be deemed a casus belli and elicit some sort of U.S. military attack on Iran?

Did Nazi Germany attack America before December 11, 1941? It was not till that day that the United States Congress declared war on Germany. Did the U.S. Congress base its declaration of war on international law? Would this have made any difference? Franklin D. Roosevelt understood very well that a Nazi-dominated Europe would have been the gravest threat to the United States. The same may be said of a nuclear-armed Iran, except that the present occupant of the White House is a post-American President, more precisely, a moral relativist. Never mind his exalting Islam, which exudes moral absolutism.

As a moral relativist, Mr. Obama should be morally indifferent to the number of civilian casualties that would inevitably result from a U.S. attack on Iran. Relativism aside, can a people rightly be held responsible for the official acts of its government?

Albert Einstein, a kindly man and a pacifist, answers this question. In a message honoring the heroes of the Warsaw ghetto, Einstein declared: “The Germans as an entire people are responsible for the mass murders and must be punished as a people if there is justice in the world and if the consciousness of collective responsibility in the nations is not to perish from the earth entirely”

Neither Roosevelt nor Churchill, who were not moral relativists, seems to have had moral qualms about the napalm-bombing of Dresden, which incinerated an estimated 25,000 Germans. The firebombing of the much more densely populated Tokyo on the night of 9/10 March 1945 was more deadly; indeed, it has been said to be single deadliest air raid of World War II, greater than Hiroshima or Nagasaki as single events.

Whether moral distinctions should be made differentiating Germany from Japan in that war is an issue beyond the scope of this essay. But this issue may arise again should the United States or Israel launch a preemptive attack on Iran. Such an attack is bound to kill “non-combatants,” but would they be entirely innocent? Have they not heard the genocidal maledictions of their government?  Besides, Iran’s government has a long criminal record of fostering and financing international terrorism. Its leaders have not only issued genocidal threats against America and Israel, but Iranian proxies have killed hundreds Americans and Israelis during the past two decades.

However, even at this late date—and Israel and America may be approaching the moment of truth—we may hope it will not be necessary to launch a preemptive attack on Iran. But we dare not obscure or minimize what is at stake in this juncture of history. Iran, a Shi’ite Muslim country of almost 80 million people stands athwart the Persian Gulf. Through the Hormuz Strait there flows much of the oil on which the world’s economy depends. It’s not just oil. The lives and quality of life of hundreds of millions of people depend on that oil.

Nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles deployed by Iran’s ruling Revolution Guard would constitute not only an obvious existential threat to Israel. Such missiles would enable Iran to control the Middle East and beyond. Ahmadinejad’s visit to Venezuela’s American-hating dictator Hugo Chavez should remind us Fidel Castro’s Cuba. Remember Nikita Khrushchev and the Cuban missile crisis?

And then there’s Europe. Iran has tested a variety of missiles. Its long range missiles can reach not only Israel but also and Europe. Europe, cowed by its own growing Muslim population will roll over. With the loss of its European markets America will collapse. This is not hyperbole. But let’s probe a little deeper, into the realm of ideas and regimes.

Part II. Post-Modern Democracy

A liberal and egalitarian democracy like the United States is psychologically ill-equipped to deal with the catastrophic threat mentioned above. America is steeped in the vulgar and anti-heroic doctrine of moral relativism. This relativism undermines national pride and a person’s readiness to fight and if necessary die for his country.

Relativism is not the only emasculating doctrine of liberal democracy. Unknown to most academics and intellectuals, liberal democracies suffer from a political versus pedagogical contradiction. On the one hand, they exalt individual freedom; on the other hand, their behavioral sciences—sociology, psychology, and criminology—generally attribute antisocial or criminal behavior to economic and genetic causes. In other words, while democracies preach freedom, their universities, by and large, teach determinism. This confusion leads to another.

Democracies are based on the primacy of consent as opposed to coercion. This predisposes their governments to resolve conflicts even with non-democratic regimes by diplomacy and reciprocity, ignoring the fact that these adversarial regimes are based on the primacy of intimidation. But what is most striking and ludicrous, as well as shameless, is the sight of liberal democratic diplomats consorting with Muslims who despise democracy and for whom mendacity is very much a way of life—a statement that can be confirmed by Muslims who have somehow liberated themselves from the decadence that has befallen Islam.

The failure of democracies to take Islam seriously—for which we may thank the Iilluminati that dominate western universities—is the reason why the awful moment of truth is approaching. While Iranian Ahmadinejad screams “death to America,” Mr. Obama’s advisers, academically processed idiots, urge him to challenge a facsimile of Genghis Kahn to a game of “Conflict Resolution.” Here, let us pause.

It should be obvious that the character of a regime shapes its foreign policies. In a democracy, those policies are very much influenced by the dogmas of democratically subservient political scientists. These academics very often become the advisers of governments, of the political officials that formulate a nation’s foreign policy. Nietzsche has said that great learning and great stupidity go well together under the same hat. I have validated Nietzsche’s adage by subjecting to critical analysis books written by Professor Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser, and books written by the late Professor Yehoshafat Harkabi, a Middle East expert who was the mentor of Shimon Peres, Israel’s erstwhile Defense Minister and Prime Minister. These two high-placed academics were moral relativists. Unsurprisingly, both were leftists.

Dot One: Brzezinski advocated drastic reductions in military expenditures on the one hand, and “outreach” to the Soviet Union on the other. (Professor B has been linked to Barack Obama, himself a relativist, who is aping the Brzezinski-Carter appeasement policy.)

Dot Two: Shimon Peres opposed the bombing of the Iraq’s Osirak reactor; orchestrated the Israel-PLO Agreement; and, like his academic mentor, advocates the creation of a Palestinian state—a nation state for what Mr. Newt Gingrich calls an “invented people” (which should make us wonder about the mentality of Harkabi, which I discuss at length in my book Demophrenia, whose thesis is that moral relativism is a mental disorder that afflicts contemporary democratic societies.)

Connect the dots. It’s not a conspiracy. The university-bred doctrine of moral relativism is a phenomenon of post-modern democracy—democracy in its senility. This doctrine, which surfaced in America in the beginning the second decade of the twentieth century, has been propagated, first by a few, then by many, and now by almost all American colleges and universities. The subject is elaborated in my article “The Crisis of Our Rimes.” The article was published in the American Congressional Record, Senate, pp. E.7150-E.7157.”

Paul, take a well deserved bow. The world is richer for your penetrating insights.

Bravo!

Repeat, Until The Cows Come Home, There Is NO “Moderate” Islam. Addendum To: What The West Knows About Islam Can Fill A Thimble. Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

This blog will continue to beat into submission the dangerous, absurd, noxious, made up out-of-whole-cloth, notion that a “moderate” Islam exists. It never did. It never will.

Western leaders, as well as their non-elected functionaries (chiefly their media surrogates; legal denizens; academic back benchers; and a rag tag assortment who will do anything to belong to the “in crowd”) possess a sundry list of reasons for continuing with their mendacity. Nevertheless, western citizens dare not comply with this charade, even for a moment longer. Not only that, doing so will kill many of the obliging souls in the process!

Besides, is “going along to get along” worth the ultimate price? Rational folks would affirm in the negative.

The commentary ‘What The West In General…And Its Leaders…Know About Islam Can Fill Less Than A Thimble’ https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/18/what-the-west-in-general-and-its-leaders-in-particular-know-about-islam-can-fill-less-than-a-thimble-morsis-muslim-mafia-crucifies-christians-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/ – skewers “moderate” Islam into nothingness.

And its “sister” piece ‘Islamists (meaning, all adherents to Islam) Have Reason To Cheer…Westerners-Not So Much..Until The Final Submission’ – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/05/islamists-have-reason-to-cheer-westerners-not-so-much-but-it-is-not-over-until-the-final-submission-how-close-are-we-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/ – is a realistic assessment of where the west is at…this writer/blog eschews pie-in-the-sky meanderings.

Placing the final nail in the coffin of “moderate” Islam, an associate, Professor Paul Eidelberg, presents a pre-eminent paper on the subject entitled ‘Islam and Blood’ – https://adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/13/islam-blood-a-groundbreaking-policy-paper-contained-herein-the-world-stands-on-a-precipice-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki-109/.

But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t room to glean additional insights. To the contrary. They are most welcome!

Therefore, once again, let’s turn to Daniel Greenfield/Sultan Knish, as he guts the left’s rendition of “moderate” Islam. 

‘The Mirage of Moderate Islam’ 

“Travelers across the vast stretches of the Arabian desert have been known to get lost and in their thirst and exhaustion hallucinate oases with palm trees and flowing water. Western policymakers lost in the vast stretches of madness that define the Muslim world are even more wont to hallucinate the oasis of a moderate Islam to take refuge in. Whether you’re dying for a drink or a way to reaffirm your reality, a mirage is sometimes the only way you can find it.”

“Moderate Islam is a mirage, a projection by desperate Westerners of their own values and culture, on an entirely different religion and culture. It is a mirage that many Muslims are eager to uphold, in the same way that desert merchants might sell goblets and bowls of sand to passing travelers foolish enough to confuse water with dust. And like travelers who think they are drinking water, when they are actually swallowing sand, it is a deception that will eventually kill the deceived.”

“When the Western cultural elite look at Islam, they see what they have to see to avoid falling into crisis mode. Like the traveler who would rather choke on sand, than face up to the fact that he is lost in a desert, they would rather keep most things as they are, even at the cost of the extinction of the nations they preside over, than confront the full scope of the threat surrounding them. A threat that they had a hand in nurturing and feeding in the name of goals that seemed to make sense at the time.”

“It is easier to segregate a “Bad Islam” composed of a tiny minority of extremists from the generally “Good Islam” of the rulers of the Muslim world and the waves of Muslim immigrants washing up on their shores. That this segregation has no objective reality, and is nothing but a psychological defense mechanism against experiencing the full reality of a disaster. From the Titanic to World War II, there are numerous similar situations in which the people in charge chose to ignore a growing crisis at a horrific cost.”

“The two primary paradigms through which Western political elites see Islam, is that of tyranny on the right, and the evils of Western foreign policy on the left. Bush employed the former when he defined the problem as being one of tyranny, rather than Islam. Having defined the problem in terms of a majority of “Good Muslims” oppressed by “Bad Tyrants”, Bush tried to liberate the former from the latter, only to discover that there was a good deal of overlap between the two. Under Obama, we have seen the left implement its own construct of Islam, as popular resistance movements against colonial oppression, who are reacting to the evils of American foreign policy. This knee jerk Marxist formula goes one worse than the Bush Administration by defining terrorists as “Good Muslims” and moderates as “Yankee Puppets”.

“But the only item of true significance to emerge from the contrast of these worldviews, is the revelation that American political leaders from both sides of the spectrum still view Islam in terms of the old Cold War struggle between Communism and Capitalism. Like many generals who fight every war in terms of the last war, the political leaders of the West still see Islam in Cold War colors, which prevents from seeing it for what it is.”

“While Islam shares some common denominators with Communism, as well as Nazism, it is also a quite different entity than either one. For one thing it is not Western in any sense of the word. It does not rely on a centralized leadership. It has had over a thousand years to seep into the culture of the regions it has conquered. That has made Islam into an identity in a much more profound way, than Adolf or Vladimir could have ever managed with their own crackpottery.”

“Islam predates the political movements such as Communism and Nazism that arose to fill a vacuum of faith in a secularizing West with dreams of racial and economic utopias. It is the original sin of the East, a ruthless religion based on stolen beliefs and stolen property, its moment of religious transcendence was not that of the law or the spirit, but the sight of tribal rivalries uniting under a single green banner. The banner of Islam.”

“The powerful appeal of Islam has been rooted in that dream of unity, an idea that is hard for more civilized peoples to understand because they take unity for granted. Yet any European need only turn to the fierce struggle for an independent and united German nation in the 19th century, or for an independent and united Italy around the same time. An eventual outcome in which both nations ruled by nationalist regimes faced off together against England and France during WW2 could be traced back to that false sense of destiny which papered over national insecurities with blood.”

“But nationalism requires meaningful national identities, while the Muslim world only has artificial borders drawn by colonial administrations, differences in Arabic slang and bitter familial rivalries. Despite the best efforts of Arab Socialist autocrats like Gamal Abdel Nasser or Saddam Hussein, the vaunted unity of the Arab nation failed to materialize. While Nasser admired Hitler and Hussein admired Stalin, neither was able to turn their respective countries into anything even as barely functional as Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia. Instead Nasser got by on Soviet aid and Saddam Hussein on oil money.”

“Glance at a map, and you will see the Muslim world defined in terms of borders and politicians, but as Allied troops along the Afghan-Pak border are discovering, the actual Muslims on the ground define themselves in terms of tribe and family, not nation. The Muslim world is a hodgepodge of dispossessed ethnic groups crammed into artificial nation states created by the UK and the UN. Nation states that have a vote at the UN, an embassy off Turtle Bay and little tangible reality.”

“If that sounds farfetched, consider that there is an actual debate among foreign policy experts over who really runs Pakistan. Many European observers of Turkey have a similar debate going there as well. Most of the Muslim world is run by families, like the rulers of Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Some are run by dictators who took part in military coups and hold power using the military and the secret police. These are the only forms of stable government in the Muslim world that matter.”

“Without a dictator or a powerful ruling family, or clique of them, civil war follows. Yemen has been torn apart by such tribal civil wars for a long time now, the latest phase of the war is being conducted with the participation of Al Queda. Anwar Al-Awlaki, the infamous Imam, did not join Al Queda merely out of anger or ideology, he did it because his Awlaki family is allied with the local Yemeni Al Queda. Think about that for a moment, and you begin to see the byzantine maze of loyalties and alliances in the vast desert of the Muslim world.”

“Empires and kingdoms combined church and state in order to insure that there would be no contradiction between religion and the authorities, that the will of the king would also be the will of god. Mohammed tried to make the same leap in the multicultural environs of Mecca, eliminating all religions, but the one he had newly created in order to glue together the warring families and tribes. That act was and is the essential basis of Islam. Everything else is borrowed glamor from the other religions that he had subjugated and destroyed to make way for Islam.”

“For Muslims that initial bloody butchery is the only true act of religious significance that matters. Because for a brief shining moment, the internecine quarrels were brutally suppressed, and thousands of backstabbing desert tribesmen came to see themselves as something larger and greater. Of course that false unity collapsed back into warring families and tribes. Which has made it all the more of an unattainable dream. It is why Jihad is the ultimate religious act for a Muslim, and why the Caliphate is the great religious goal.”

“In the face of this understanding, any talk of a moderate Islam is nothing but a farce. To Muslims, Islam is what the Thousand Year Reich was to Nazis and a United World is to socialists. A perfect form of global unity that must be achieved at any cost.”

“A moderate Muslim might pursue such a goal “peacefully” through Dawa or missionary work, but successful Muslim mass conversions have taken place either directly or indirectly through the sword. Even Muslim missionary successes in the West take place in the context of Muslim terrorism. There is no Islam without the sword, because it has no meaning or identity without violence. A non-violent Islam is nothing but a collection of tribal mores and borrowed religious ideas. It quickly recedes to the secular and the cultural, driving the Islamists to revive its core ethos through acts of violence and terror.”

“This is what Western political and cultural leaders do not understand. The Right is correct that Islam like Communism can be weakened by capitalism, but it cannot be destroyed that way. Because Islam is not incompatible with business, it originated among merchants after all. The fruits of capitalism can help secularize Islam, but not without empowering the very same type of merchants who helped create it. That is why American capitalism has helped create the terrorist threat by enriching the new rulers of Mecca, the House of Saud, which has expanded its own power by funding a new Islamic invasion against its best customers in the West. And so history repeats itself again.”

“The Islamists have shown that they can quite effectively exploit Capitalism and Democracy to further their aims. Capitalism brought down the Soviet Union, but it could not give Russians a meaningful identity. Instead it financed the rise of a new Russian totalitarian regime of KGB bosses and oligarchs who had grown wealthy on the profits from Western business. Even Communist China has shown that it can incorporate Capitalism and only become more of a threat by doing so.”

“The fundamental error conservative American political leaders made was to assume that Capitalism and Democracy were absolute forms of good, in reality they’re simply tools and prisms which different cultures use to express their potential in different ways. The Bush Administration showed the limits of applying Cold War rhetoric to Islamic realities. Or treating 1.5 billion Muslims as the demographic equivalent of a 1500 nuclear bombs, without ever admitting the attitude behind the diplomacy.”

“The Left however is even more wrong, falling back on its old habit of treating all enemies as resistance movements against capitalism, globalism and all the isms that they associate with First World nation states. If the Right is still echoing Ronald Reagan, the Left is still stuck on the Philippine–American War of the 19th century. And while the Right has shown that it can learn, the Left has only shown that it can shout the same self-destructive thing even louder. The Obama Administration is an exercise in national self-hatred. A ritual purging for the sins of Western success similar to an anorexic vomiting after every meal.”

“If the Right has some ideas for dealing with Islam, the Left has decided that Islam is right. There is no logic behind this, but that of “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”, along with healthy doses of orientalism and the fetishization of the Noble Savage.”

“American foreign policy triggers Muslim rage, as do cartoons in Europe, Jewish housing in Israel, Buddhist statues in Afghanistan, British female tourists in Dubai, a teddy named Mohammed in Sudan, and countless other “irritations”. But none of these excuses are the real cause. The chief cause of Islamic outrage, is that these displays of anger allow Muslims to feel a sense of power. Anger empowers small men, whether they are beating their wives or blowing themselves up in cafes. The excuses, “She made do it”, “She shouldn’t have walked in front of the TV” or “She should have had dinner ready”, are just that. Excuses. The real cause is the sense of power that comes with the anger. The sense of suddenly being larger than life. That anger is its own cause and its own reward. And that is what Islam gives to the Muslim. The Jihad. The Caliphate. Anger in the name of Allah.”

“In America, Democratic and Republican leaders primarily differ on how tiny that “tiny minority of extremists” really is, and who’s to blame for their extremism. The ugly reality that their entire view of Islam is based on a mirage, is not something they are willing to accept. But to talk of the Taliban or Al Queda without speaking of Islam, is as absurd as discussing the Gulags without mentioning Communism. It means that not only can the problem never be solved, but it can never even be addressed. Because we have never stated the cause.”

“Instead we try to fight Islamic terrorism by cultivating alliances among the constantly churning factions of governments, militias, warlords and tribal elders, hoping to use them– only to be used as pawns in their own games instead. That is what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq. It has happened among the Palestinian Arabs and the Yemeni government, in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and anywhere else we try to apply Western policy making.”

“The Muslim world has technology, but no civilization. Western nations have given to the Islamic East, the appearance of nationhood and the fruits of industry, without ever acknowledging that they were tossing pearls before swine. A pig wearing a pearl necklace is still a member of the porcine family. Only now it is a well-dressed pig. We have dressed up the Muslim world, but underneath it is not so different from the warring tribes that Mohammed tried to glue together with Islam. And that is why Islam retains the power that it does. Islam does not have a separation of Mosque and State, because there is really no state, only the mosque. The great dream of over a millennium of a transcendent global Muslim unity. A Great Leap Forward across the chasm of tribal savagery and into a Caliphate, which will undo all the achievements of all other peoples, and demonstrate once and for all that the Muslim is supreme over all the rest of the world.” – http://sultanknish.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/the-mirage-of-moderate-islam.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+FromNyToIsraelSultanRevealsTheStoriesBehindTheNews+(from+NY+to+Israel+Sultan+Reveals+The+Stories+Behind+the+News)

In the main, it is patently clear that Greenfield supports the dominant thesis of ‘Islam & Blood’ presented by Professor Eidelberg – with the assistance of this writer – in the above embedded policy paper.
In plain parlance, either western leaders bury Islam (through a reformation, or other agreed processes) or it will bury us.
No doubt about it. There is no time to lose.