Wednesday, December 31, 2008



. . . to all friends, readers, visitors, supporters, and supporting blogs,

from . . .

Islamic Danger to Americans
How to Stop the Islamic Jihad
Islamic Danger FU
The Jew in Yellow
islamic Danger 2U
Islamic Danger to Bharat (India)
Islamic Danger in History
Islamic Danger (original, now censored)
On the Back of My Mind

The Islamic Danger family of blogs

May the new year bring us all joy and glorious times, with the opposite to all who wish us ill and seek to destroy us.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Arab World ? A Myth!

by Jugurten

When a child, growing in my native Kabylia, I used to sing song… one that still sticks in my mind: When comes Spring in Kentucky… I didn’t know where Kentucky was… so I substituted the word Kabylia… in the song… and what a beautiful song it was then… and I still find myself humming it occasionally..

And this brings me to the idea of the arab world: I remember vaguely that I was told some folks in Algiers and surrounding area spoke a strange language, a mixture of berber and Arabic… Although theses people were berbers, I know this since many of them happened to be my cousins; one would call them arabs… Why? Don’t ask me.. Because the answer is simple.

When the first French settlers came to what they named Algeria, they assumed the country’s people were arabs. As simple as that.

For us Kabyle, we never asked ourselves the question as to what we were, it would have been absurd. But today, we realize the History had failed us.

When Algeria was busy fighting to recover its independence, some dark forces were at work, in the shadows of foreign lands. Somewhere in the middle east, some Algerians had the idea that if they aligned them selves with the so called arab world, they would get badly needed help.

How wrong they were!

They discovered a world that did not correspond to what men thought… and still today, the average western man is unaware that the arab world exist only in the mind of some with a hidden agenda. Hidden agenda, mind you, because there were some gains along with keeping that myth alive.
You know, there is oil out there and specially a docile group of diverse people…..
If we consider the Moslem world, western countries refer to them as the arab world!
Egypt has long been one that trumpeted its ideology… in the name of “arabs”…. Needless to say that it took them more then 20 years to slide into a forgotten state.
Iraq? Syria? … Where did the Assyrians, the kurds, druses Armenians… and all those ancient people go? Did they just fade away with the time? No they are still there, by acquired the arab language and culture. But does that make them arabs?
In case you answered YES, then you should also consider all the descendants of slaves in the USA as being white… since the acquired the white ways, language and culture…
Then we have the whole of North Africa….
True, some regions have developed a new language… from berber and Arabic… and yet the common man does not know that the morrocan peasant can not understand an Egyptian or a jordanian…

Where is the arab world?

There is not any…Only a myth…

More over, when we talk about the arab unity, the arab league….Where has it been .. or where is it ? I submit to you, it is a joke!

Islam is probably the only common link between these people and yet, for a person who has gone through these countries, the Islam one practices in one region is totally different from one in another region… It amuses me to read in Internet some lost characters who pretend in some unity… Just imagine the Christians pretending that across the globe everyone is in tune to the Vatican…

The World today, and mainly the Western World, must awake: The idea of a Greater Middle East… is a fancied world that must be dropped… for the good of all concerned.

I crisscross North America…and mainly USA… a Country with One Constitution, one Federal Government… and yet we have a diverse peoples from coast to coats… Don’t tell me that people of New Mexico Maine, Alabama… or Montana are alike!

I would laugh in my beard and dare say you know not the United States peoples..!

It’s the same with the so called arab world:
I’ll tell you something about my native Algeria: Peoples from different region are so different… you could swear you are in different countries In this is quite normal: If the nation of the USA was born in 1776 … Algeria as we know it was born in 1830….. and before that it amount to a series of mini states that formed confederations as the time required alliances…

Only when settled by the French did these territories acquire a sort of state hood before independence in 1962… The French Revolution is still incomplete… and yet it started almost fifty years earlier… then how do you see Algeria? The same applies to the whole of North Africa…

So please, let forget the terms used to name theses countries: We have names… so why do some people insist on telling us we live in the Magrheb, In the Great Middle East..

Please, leave us alone: We live in Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia… in North Africa if you like just as you live in North America or South East Asia…

Please let ban the word Maghreb because it has no meaning. Maghreb means literally WEST…. I beg to ask: West of WHAT ? Why not East of the Atlantic for that matter! As for arab countries? There may exist one or two… if theses folks who inhabit them recognize themselves as arabs….

The United States refused to call itself an English Country although initially… Englishmen seceded from Great Britain… then why name us arabs since everyone know we are not arabs…

Unless… unless the western world is ignorant of the facts.

In which case, I invite all and everyone to get educated in the subject…. And I am sure that if you inquired… you will find out… that there maybe some connection with some middle eastern people… but the mainstream of peoples are anything… but arab… in the very countries you so wrongly call “arab countries”!


Posted Thu, 09/11/2008 - 11:11 by Jugurten

Why are non-Arabs More Devout Muslims than Arabs?

The Non Arab Muslims
by Mumin Salih at

The Arabs commonly say: Aazzana Allahu bil Islam, which means that Allah has made us (the Arabs) valued because of Islam. The Arabs point of view is straight forward; they were insignificant Arab tribes in the desert of Arabia who later ruled a vast Islamic empire. I don’t think there are many Arabs who question the accuracy of the above statement; even some Arab atheists tend to agree with it even though they also believe that Mohammed was a liar and brutal gang leader. However, the subject that the Arabs are far better off without Islam is beyond the scope of this article. But the question that springs to my mind whenever I hear the above Arabic adage is: can any other Muslim nation claim that Allah made them valued because of Islam? Can the Indians or the Iranians, who had a formidable empire in the seventh century, make such a claim?

Islam, a language based religion

Islam is the only religion in the world that is completely based on a language. Islam can only survive in an Arabic language environment, if the Arabic language disappears Islam also disappears. Learning the Arabic language is mandatory to all Muslims in order to read the Quran and perform the Islamic rituals.

continued at

The Berber Languages

by Lameen Souag

Berber is a family of closely related languages indigenous to North Africa, touching the Mediterranean and Atlantic to the north and west, and spoken as far east as Siwa in Egypt and as far south as northern Burkina Faso (with emigrant groups even further afield.). The term “Tamazight”, the traditional autonym of a number of Berber languages, is increasingly used as an alternative. The largest Berber languages by population are, from west to east: Tashelhiyt/Shilha (south Morocco); Middle Atlas Tamazight (central Morocco); Tarifit/Rifi (north Morocco); Taqbaylit/Kabyle (northeast Algeria); Tashawit/Chaouia (northeast Algeria).

While these are spoken across reasonably large, densely populated, continuous
areas, many varieties are restricted to a handful of villages (eg Ghomara in north Morocco) or a single oasis (eg Siwa in Egypt), often with little contact with other Berber speakers. The mutual intelligibility of Berber varieties varies substantially, making a division into languages difficult in practice; the whole family could be seen as consisting of two more or less broken up dialect continua, one in the North and one in the South, with a few more divergent outliers around the edges.

Almost every Berber language is surrounded by colloquial Maghreb Arabic speakers
on all sides, and is spoken in a state whose official language is Modern Standard Arabic, and in which the ex-colonial language (usually French) remains significant in official domains. The languages of the Tuareg (a sparse, partly nomadic population spread across a vast expanse of the Sahara) have come under much less Arabic influence than others; along with Zenaga (the nearly extinct Berber language of Mauritania), they have also been influenced by sub-Saharan African languages.

1.2 History

Berber is a subgroup of Afro-Asiatic; as such, it is distantly related to Arabic (and other Semitic languages of the Middle East), Egyptian, Somali (and other Cushitic or Omotic languages of East Africa), and Hausa (and other Chadic languages of West Africa.) It was already spoken in North Africa before the Roman conquest, as the Tifinagh inscriptions of the Numidian kings attest.

In the 7th century, the Arab Umayyad Empire conquered most of North Africa. While
the area resumed independence within a century or so, the results of this conquest were lasting; most northern Berbers converted to Islam, and Arabic became an important part of city life, widely used in government and trade. In the 11th century, large Arab tribes (in particular the Banu Hilal) immigrated en masse from Arabia via Egypt, leading to the collapse of state authority in much of North Africa and to the presence of large rural Arabic-speaking groups. This seems to have been a turning point in the Arabization of North Africa; with
Arabic both useful on a local scale and prestigious on a broader scale, many Berber groups gradually shifted to Arabic. Some have done so within living memory; for example, the village of Sened in Tunisia was still largely Berber-speaking at the beginning of the 20th century, but is now entirely Arabic-speaking. The long-standing influence of Arabic is reflected in most Berber languages' tendency to use Arabic numbers.

from The Typology of Number Borrowing in Berber
by Lameen Souag
View as HTML

Dictionnaire berbère français, traduction en ligne - LEXILOGOS >> -

Civilisation berbère

histoire : de la Berbérie au Maghreb arabe

Histoire des Berbères et des dynasties musulmanes de l'Afrique septentrionale, par Ibn Khaldoun (XIVe), traduction en français par William Mac Guckin, baron de Slane (1852)
I - II - III - IV

Algérie - Maroc - Afrique

dictionnaire arabe

civilisation arabe

forum Babel consacré aux langues d'ici & d'ailleurs

Coptic - the language of ancient Egypt

from The Coptic Language: Will it be Resurrected? by thewinterrider at American Sentinel

The Islamic conquest of Egypt involved harsh repression of coptic as a spoken language. . . . today, the adherents of Coptic Christianity endure civic liabilities in Egypt that are unimaginable in the west.


It is generally believed that Coptic is an extinct language, alive only in the prayer books and scriptures of Coptic Christianity, which is one of the major branches of the Christian faith tradition. Coptic is the language of ancient Egypt. Unlike Arabic , it is not Semitic but Afro Asiatic. In its earliest from, it was written with hieroglyphics. Later, it was written with a phonetic alphabet which is mainly Greek but has added characters for sounds not found in Greek.

The Islamic conquest of Egypt involved harsh repression of coptic as a spoken language. Indeed even today, the adherents of Coptic Christianity endure civic liabilities in Egypt that are unimaginable in the west.

The most commonly believed time line of the Coptic language lists the mid 1600’s as the time in which the last speaker of this language died. Now there are reports that the language may still be spoken, still a living language.

The most solid report of Coptic language survival comes from the Coptic Monastery of St. Anthony in the Red Sea Mountains about 110 miles southeast of Cairo. According to the “redbooks” web site, the monks in this monastery speak Coptic among themselves as a language of daily business and discourse . The article notes as follows.

“Amazingly, the monks who live here still speak Coptic, a language directly descended from the language of the ancient Egyptians.”

Of course, what really makes a language alive is when families pass it on to children, or better still, when villages perpetuate an endangered tongue. Such reports about Coptic are not numerous enough for those who wish the language well.

Despite this, there is a report of an extended Egyptian family that speaks Coptic among themselves, including even the detail of a woman who got strange looks when she spoke it on her cell phone.

The Daily Star of Egypt reports ‘ “Mona Zaki is one of only a handful of people that continue to use the language in everyday conversation. She speaks a colloquial form of Coptic with her parents and a few relatives that dates back 2,000 years.

“In many ways it helps strengthen my faith,” Zaki said. “It has really helped when I go to church because they still use a form of Coptic for many services.” Her dialect, however, differs slightly from the standard Coptic that is used for study and church services.

She does not speak Coptic with her children.

“I felt that Coptic was a worthless language to have my children speak, therefore I did not do so when they were young,” said Zaki.

Coptic is the language of the first Christian church in history, and when the members of the two families that speak the colloquial form of Coptic die, it will be the first language of the early Christian churches to become extinct.”

Sadly, this article paints a portrait of a language in its dying stages , with one of its last speakers apologetically explaining her decision not to transmit it to her children.

The article about Ms. Zaki does however cautiously offer hope for the survival of Coptic as a language in the following paragraph.

“Some scholars have theorized that some remote villagers in the Delta region of Egypt or in the south of the country may still speak forms of the Coptic language. Because many Egyptians live in small villages away from government control and active study by anthropologists, it is theorized that Coptic will persist despite official numbers.”

It should be noted that the remoteness and disconnectedness of remote regions in the Arab world may actually be preserving many secrets. Americans who live in nuclear families that often spread out over wide areas are not equipped to preserve ancient traditions. The incursion of modernisation can sound the death knell for a language that is surviving. A case in point is Cuba, where Yoruba survived as a spoken language, until its speakers were sent to state boarding schools. This broke the chain of transmission for Yoruba in Cuba. Today, Yoruba in the Western hemisphere lives on in Brazil.

The factor of Islamic fundamentalism can not be ignored. There are too many examples of destruction of archeological treasures for political reasons. The Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Israel has been the scene of much Arab construction work, in which many Jewish artifacts and landmarks have been damaged and destroyed. It might actually be better for Coptic speakers to remain hidden for their own safety in the current political climate.

There is a place for archaeology, a very important place. But it is the living who make the shards and fragments of the past come alive. The treasures of Egypt are not only hidden in pyramids or underground vaults, they are in the hearts and on the tongues of its people. It would greatly benefit us all if these treasures were recognised and preserved.

read the whole article at

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Le Zénaga des tribus sénégalaises ... Faidherbe, Léon (1818-1889).

Faidherbe, Léon (1818-1889). Le Zénaga des tribus sénégalaises ...
View as HTML

Le berbère en Mauritanie : une langue en voie d’extinction.,936.html

Grammaire Amazigh


Audaces conquistadores que, en otro tiempo, extendieron sus dominios más allá del Estrecho de Gibraltar, como sus antepasados habían protagonizado diversas rebeliones contra la dominación de romanos, vándalos y bizantinos, los hablantes zenagas (o iznayen, en amazighe) han quedado reducidos en la actualidad a un pequeño grupo en la costa sudoccidental de Mauritania. Pese a todo, su nombre evoca una de las grandes ramas de la etnia y la historia amazighes, de la que todavía se sienten herederos no pocas comunidades por toda la Tamazgha, aunque ya muy mezcladas con otros aportes humanos, sobre todo árabes.

Del ahora agonizante dialecto zenaga, se ocupó el autor que en esta oportunidad llega a nuestras páginas. Louis Léon César Faidherbe (1818-1889), destacado oficial del ejército francés, sirvió en Argelia de 1842 a 1847 y, tras un brevísimo paso por Guadalupe, regresó a la colonia norteafricana entre 1849 y 1852, fecha en la que fue trasladado a Senegal, donde ocupó el cargo de gobernador en dos ocasiones; la primera, de 1854 a 1861 y, la segunda, de 1863 a 1865.

Ingeniero militar, dirigió intensas campañas de ocupación en el África noroccidental, que le permitieron conocer con detalle las características geográficas de la región, así como la historia y etnografía de sus poblaciones, aspecto a los que dedicó varios estudios. A pesar del enfoque colonialista que impregna su obra, los trabajos que realizó poseen un valor indudable, pues reúnen testimonios e informes de un observador privilegiado e instruido. No en vano, por ejemplo, dirigió una misión científica en el Alto Egipto, donde halló inscripciones líbicas; estudió los materiales epigráficos numídicos y fenicios, y escribió sobre otras lenguas senegalesas, a las que confirió un tratamiento preferente en el Annuaire du Sénégal.

Aquí exponemos a continuación una pequeña muestra de su interesante labor investigadora, muy poco conocida fuera de los ámbitos especializados. La «Introducción» que volcamos al español pertenece a una pieza fundamental en la bibliografía lingüística amazighe, ya que el general Faidherbe compuso la primera descripción sistemática del dialecto zenaga, hoy casi extinto, hablado por entonces, la segunda mitad del siglo XIX, en el sur de Mauritania y en Senegal. El texto traducido, una mera aproximación etnohistórica, muestra sin embargo con mucha sencillez unas pinceladas muy relevantes del papel desplegado por este pueblo en algunos momentos de su pasado.

Autor: Louis Faidherbe.
Título: Le Zénaga des tribus Sénégalaises. Contribution à l’Étude de la Langue Berbère.
Edición: París, Ernest Leroux, 1877.
Fragmento: «Introduction», pp. 1-5.
Traducción del original francés: Ignacio Reyes.


El señor Renan, en su obra publicada en 1863 sobre las lenguas semíticas [*], propuso formar una familia denominada camítica con la lengua egipcia y sus congéneres. Dijo que futuras investigaciones revelarían si los idiomas bereberes, formas actuales del libio, deberían ser incluidas en la misma familia. Él sostuvo desde entonces como un hecho probado que estos idiomas no pertenecían a la familia de las lenguas semíticas, aunque presentaban afinidades gramaticales con éstas.

Desde ese momento, a medida que se alcanzó un mayor conocimiento del egipcio en sus diferentes épocas y de los dialectos bereberes, se estuvo en condiciones de comparar estas lenguas entre sí y determinar su grado de parentesco con las lenguas semíticas.

Es lo que acaba de hacer el señor marqués de Rochemonteix, en un trabajo presentado al Congreso Internacional de Orientalistas de París, en 1873, y que se acaba de publicar en 1876 (1).

Sus conclusiones son que (página 75): «La raza bereber y la raza egipcia han tenido las mismas raíces pronominales y han empleado procedimientos idénticos para formar el plural y los pronombres absolutos. La acción del tiempo y la índole de cada lengua sólo han aportado modificaciones superficiales que no impiden encontrar con facilidad los mismos elementos en los pronombres».

Añade (página 87) que «el estudio de las formas gramaticales muestra que las dos lenguas tienen el mismo punto de partida y emplean idénticos materiales, que tratan por los mismos procedimientos, para la creación de los matices verbales en los substantivos y su plural».

Respecto a la comparación de los idiomas bereberes con las lenguas semíticas, reconoce reglas comunes en la conjugación; dice (página 98): «Estoy inclinado a creer que, tras mucho tiempo en contacto con la raza semítica, los pueblos bereberes, iniciados en una conjugación totalmente hecha en una lengua que se les hizo familiar, conjugación que dio a la expresión una precisión mayor, adaptaron a su tiempo rudimentario las formas del aoristo semítico».

Se resume diciendo (página 10) que ha constatado la identidad de los elementos gramaticales del egipcio y del bereber.

Pero el señor de Rochemonteix declara (página 69) que sólo ha podido interpretar los datos tomados de los dos dialectos bereberes sobre los cuales el general Hanoteau ha publicado sendas gramáticas, a saber: la gramática cabilia en 1859 y la gramática tuareg en 1863 [**].

Habiendo concebido la idea, después de tener conocimiento del trabajo del señor de Rochemonteix, de comunicarle un estudio sumario que yo había hecho en 1854 sobre el dialecto zenaga, hablado por los bereberes de Senegal, me dijo que pensaba que la publicación de este trabajo sería muy útil a la ciencia.

Por ese motivo me he decidido a darlo al público, tal cual, es decir, como fue escrito en 1854, cuando aún no habían aparecido ni las gramáticas del general Hanoteau ni la del señor H. Stanhope Freeman (1862) [***].

Me parece oportuno ofrecer algunas nociones históricas sobres los bereberes-zenaga en cuestión.

Sin remontarnos a los libios, de los cuales he hablado en varios trabajos que he publicado desde 1868 (2), me contentaré con repasar la excelente obra de Ibn Jaldún, historiador árabe del siglo XIV [****]. «Toda el África septentrional hasta el país de los negros», dice, «ha estado habitada por la raza bereber, y esto desde una época de la que no conocemos ni los acontecimientos anteriores ni el principio».

Las naciones más célebres de la raza bereber fueron los zenatas, los zenagas, después los masmudas, etc.

encore . . .

Monday, December 15, 2008

Islam In Action

via Islamic terrorism in India

A succinct presentation of the history of the peace religion . . .
Follow this link

Saturday, December 6, 2008

Libya and the confiscated lands of Imazighen (Berbers)

Libya and the confiscated lands of Imazighen
9 November 2008

EMMAR* Libya and the confiscated lands of Imazighen

*Global real estate properties in UAE

The last two years an investment plans under taken by the Libyan government and supported by the Arab investors from the UAE (United Arab Emirates) planning to reconcile a project that will integrates under roof of developing special zone in the Zwara region noticing that the Libyan regime ignores and non-supportive for any local investment. This time, EMAAR* moved into another new territory taking the global colonization policy, moving up with resigning contracts [1] when it signed a joint venture agreement in Libya with the Zwara - bu Kemash Development Zone with its unofficial head; son of Kaddafi, Saadi Muammer Kaddafi, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Zwara - bu Kemash Development Zone placing his signature on a contract with EMAAR chairman.

More than 200 km² of confiscated lands by the mental corrupted regime and then what we lose our land our identity our self determination on which we struggle for. And this contaminates for the sake of what? Declared as minorities creatures by whom? An illusionary constitution, the law of tainted ideologies and abused policies under the name of National Arab Security.

“We are focused on developing the country’s infrastructure to further support the trade, tourism, industrial and services sectors, which will create economic alternatives and reduce dependence on oil revenues..." Saadi Kaddafi [2] to the Libyan press. That will be very simple to Kaddafi’s son; oil income is no longer for the Libyan now officially owned by them.

However, the reaction may have been predicted given its scope and will likely lead to a challenges by imazighen and their land through announcement called by some Amazigh militant with their long struggle holding the right to refuse in use of manipulation act with authority since the regime confront any sort of reaction of refusing by imazighen of Zwara tend to stop the uphold colonization investment. Still the state concern on how to convince them to resign their territory with bit of Dinars, although those North African governments are now enhancing their investments projects with the Arab nations substantially.

Its new political agenda in this case Zwara an Amazighphone region will face a rapid change from implementing this project specially when this area extends through long coastline will include Farwa island [3]. When it comes to series of steps announced by the Libyan government including plans for privatization which is the key pillars in its transition to a more free market economy its surely a different matter. But the privatization is only a new tactics played by the regime and this time by Kaddafi’s sons [4].

Considering his unveiled address by Saadi kaddafi, and his poor and useless words convincing his loyalty to the regime were he tried on the other hand to convince the Libyans his project, turning back the actual need of every Libyans (home, education, health, jobs better living conditions) how difficult it is to convince people, especially the educated youth and the intellectuals, to change traditional ways and adapt themselves to new conditions with the land burglar.

They have under taken some legacies for themselves without notifying Libyan people this is the case and a fact proven; were although many if not all, of these billions of dinars worth of chaos projects were withdrawn from the general financial cabinet. It’s only a matter of time reconciling our self step on maintaining the last piece of mosaic; the truth behind the new Libya.

The brave Amazigh women and men in our militant cultural and political movement have demonstrated their willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice so that our Tamazight identity, ancestor’s homeland and freedom of speech, the faith of democracy can be preserved by us will continue our long lasting struggle. It is up to our people and Tamazgha nation as a whole to ensure that it is not the case of what they think we are but it is who we are.

By M.B.

30-10-2008 Adrar Nefusa - Libya

[1] [2] 2006-11-13.

[3] It was known once that this island were inhabited by imazighen until in 1969, Kaddafi overthrew the government of King Idris they all moved to Zwara leaving their island in the hands of corrupters.

[4] From media to hug telecom industrial, business centers, NGOs ...etc to the National Security Council it is all ruled and owned by Kaddafi’s sons.

Friday, December 5, 2008


Voir aussi :
« La bataille de l’uranium a commencé »
Reponse a l’Amiral d’Arbonneau !
Rassemblement de solidarité à Paris le 15 décembre 2007
Un tournant pour le Mouvement des Nigériens pour la Justice ?
Après les Tutsi du Rwanda, la France veut elle organiser le génocide des Touareg du Niger ?
"NIGER, le retour rampant de l’exception"
Vous êtes ici : Accueil » L’info » Droits humain

Désert Rebel à Mains d’Oeuvres
4 décembre 2008

Dès 15h • projections et rencontre, entrée libre Dès 20h00 • Concerts, 10€ en prévente /13€

Mains d’Œuvres s’associe à Cultures et Résistances en accueillant en résidence pendant un mois les musiciens touaregs et français du collectif Désert Rebel. Un espace de travail mis à disposition pour la création musical et vidéo du Sound System et la répétition du live, des rencontres et des ateliers seront mis en place sur le territoire avec les habitants de saint-Ouen. A l’issue de leur résidence, ils présenteront pour la première fois leur Sound system.

encore . . .

Al-Qaeda in Iraq Commander Urges Algerian Mujahideen to Fight Christian Berbers

Kabylia - Terrorism - islam
Al-Qaeda in Iraq Commander Urges Algerian Mujahideen to Fight Christian Berbers
2 December 2008

Abu Turab Al-Jaza’iri, an Algerian jihadist who claims to be a commander in Al-Qaeda in Iraq, recently posted a letter on the Shumukh Al-Islam jihadist forum urging members of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb to fight Berbers from the Kabylia region who have converted to Christianity. The MEMRI (...) continue

Tuesday, December 2, 2008


BEWARE! Many blog- and websites not friendly to the violence and murder practiced by ISLAM have been infected with viruses and trojans.

See that your anti-virus software is installed and up to date. So far, I have gotten infected at Jihad Watch and warned that site of the problem.

Radarsite also appears to be infected as well as Shadow Warrior.

Please keep on visiting the above-named sites but warn the site if you find an infection

If any of you find this blog to be infected, please let me know.

I frequently run my anti-virus progam to keep the site virus-free.

Leslie White

Saturday, November 22, 2008

When will the Arabic-Islamic colonialism end?

All the Amazighs (Berbers) in Algeria-the Kabylians, Chaouis, Touregs, Chenouis and the Mzabs-have always been and continue to be the victims of Islamist colonialism for 14 centuries, since the death of Dihia ( A Berber Queen who fought against the first Arabic-Islamic hordes which invaded Algeria).

continued at

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Un pays conquis par les arabes est bientot ruiné (IBN KHALDOUN)

Un pays conquis par les arabes est bientot ruiné (IBN KHALDOUN)

L'Amazighophobie, la goutte qui va faire déborder le vase en Afrique du Nord. C'est les résultats d'une overdose du panarabisme d'orient importé en Afrique du Nord.

S'il y a une chose sur laquelle se sont mis d'accord les pouvoirs politiques et leur oppositions en Afrique du Nord c'est la destruction de l'identité Amazighe. Et son remplacement par une identité arabe. C'est un crime qui dépasse l'homicide. Un jour l'histoire en parlera. A bon entendeur. les Amazighs bravo pour votre sort maudit.

Amazighophobie à Tamazgha occidentale (Maroc+Mauritanie)
Amazighophobie à Tamazgha centrale (Algerie-Tunisie)
Amazighophobie à Tamazgha orientale (Lybie-Siwa)

Modern Arabic: the Tool of Islamic Terrorism Promotion

Note: This is an excerpt from the article. read the entire article at

Modern Arabic: the Anglo-French Tool of Islamic Terrorism Promotion
Posted Thu, 09/11/2008 - 00:26 by Jugurten

When Napoleon sailed to Egypt (this was the first major step in the effort to materialize the aforementioned plan), there was no Arabic speaking nation, and there was no Arabic spoken as native language to any people, except Arabia (here I mean Hedjaz, so the western mountains, and Nafd, so the northern desert of today’s Saudi Arabia).

Modern Arabic: French fabrication of a fake language to de-personify, de-valorize, radicalize and barbarize

Through the creation of a fake modern Arabic language , the French prevented a genuine Nation building in the area, ensured that the local peoples would never have access to their identity, and like this gave the Wahhabist sheikhs a most powerful tool of de-personification, de-valorization, radicalization and barbarization. The so idiotically venerated French ‘mission civilisatrice’ is truly speaking a ‘mission barbarisatrice’.

The French created what is the concept of Arabic as Modern Language, and (as an extension to it - at a second stage) the Arab nationalism - supreme stage of the colonialism.

What existed, as linguistic - ethnic groups’ situation, in 1798 throughout all the lands that belong to modern state members of the Arab League, is this:

1. Arabic had ceased to exist as native language (with the aforementioned exception); it was only the religious language of the Muslims, but it was a dead language - which means that it was not native to anyone.

2. Local, historical, native languages were in use, as follows (not extensive list):

I. Berberic in Northern Africa (involving Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt)

II. Coptic in Egypt

III. Nubian (several dialects) in Egypt and Northern Sudan

IV. Fur (in Northwestern Sudan)

V. Beja (in Eastern Sudan)

VI. Hadendawa (in Eastern Sudan)

VII. Tigrigna (in Eritrea)

VIII. Tigray (in Eritrea)

IX. Afar (in Eritrea and Djibouti)

X. Mahrani (in South Yemen)

XI. Soqotri (in Soqotra island)

XII. Somali (in Somalia)

XIII. Aramaic (Syriac Aramaic being divided to two groups, Western and Eastern, spoken in Syria, parts of today’s Southeastern Turkey, Iraq, Southwestern Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, Emirates, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine and Israel),

XIV. Ottoman Turkish (in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine, Israel, Kuwait, Qatar, Emirates, Yemen, Oman, and Saudi Arabia)

XV. Kirkassian, Turkmen, and other Turkic languages (in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine, Israel, Kuwait, Qatar, Emirates, Yemen, Oman, and Saudi Arabia)

XVI. Kurdish (in three languages and six dialects, in Syria, Iraq, and parts of today’s Eastern Turkey), and

XVII. Farsi.

3. Various idioms / languages had emerged in different places and consisted in per case linguistic amalgamations based on

I. Ottoman Turkish (administrative language) - participated in amalgamations throughout the area under study

II. Arabic (religious language) - participated in amalgamations throughout the area under study

III. Farsi (cultural language) - participated in amalgamations mostly in parts of Eastern Turkey, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Emirates, Yemen, Somalia (Farsi was the only native language in Bahrain), and

IV. the aforementioned 17 historical, native languages. These languages played a greater role in the case they spoken by non isolated groups; for instance the Beja and the Soqotri were mostly living in isolated areas, whereas Aramaeans, Copts, and Berbers were living throughout their historical lands in the Asiatic part of the Middle East (the first), Egypt (the second) and NW Africa (the last).

Among these 17 native languages, the most active to participate in the linguistic amalgamation phenomenon were precisely Aramaic, Coptic and Berberic (in their respective areas). These idioms co-existed with the aforementioned historical native languages, and were more than one per case; to give an example, in Egypt there were more than two amalgamated languages based on linguistic mixture of Coptic with Arabic and Turkish (localisms prevailed and the linguistic amalgamation was different in the Delta, Alexandria, Cairo and various parts of Upper Egypt).

It was a very complex situation, as it implied (to give an example, we take Egypt) the parallel existence of the following languages:

1.Berberic (mostly in the Northern coast and the Western deserts)

2.Nubian (several dialects - in the south of Qena)

3.Beja (in the south of Mersa Alam)

4.Ottoman Turkish (administrative language)

5.Turkic languages (mostly spoken by the Mameluks)

6.Coptic (spoken throughout the country, as native and religious language)

7.Arabic (dead language - used only as religious means of communications by the Egyptian Muslims)

8.Coptic - Arabic - Ottoman Turkish amalgamated idiom of Alexandria

9.Coptic - Arabic - Ottoman Turkish amalgamated idiom of Delta

10.Coptic - Arabic - Ottoman Turkish amalgamated idiom of Cairo

11.- 12. Coptic - Arabic - Turkish amalgamated idioms of Upper Egypt

If we carry out a research about the proportion of the population each of these 12 parallel languages represented, we can be certain that the majority was using the five amalgamated idioms (nos 8 to 12).

It is essential to underscore the extent of the amalgamation in this regard; a Muslim from Sohag, who was speaking one of the Upper Egyptian linguistic amalgamations of Coptic - Arabic - Ottoman Turkish, would be characterized by the following determinant traits:

a - he would not be able to read and understand the Coran, except he had studied in local Coranic schools, which was a thin minority matter.

b - he could not understand people speaking

1. Aramaic - Arabic - Ottoman Turkish amalgamated idiom of Damascus,

2. Berberic - Arabic - Ottoman Turksih amalgamated idiom of Tunis, and

3. Arabic spoken in Madinah.

Preventing Nation Building and favoring the extremist Wahhabists

If the situation was like that, what a genuine effort of nation building throughout the Ottoman Empire would have implied, if the colonial interference had not taken place?

To answer this question, we must study what happened in other cases of nation building, when various peoples became independent during the 19th and the 20th centuries, and took care of their perception of their identity, history and past, as well as of their need to have a genuine means of oral and written communication, i.e. a language that would reflect the national identity. If we make comparisons between the cases of Italy, Serbia, Greece, Turkey and Egypt, we will be able to note that all these cases are very different one from another, and that wherever we have to deal with French involvement, Greece and Egypt, we attest very different French attitude.

Whereas in Greece the French did their best to incite an interest about the past, a kind of archeolatrous neo-classicism, an interest for linguistic purification and re-introduction of Ancient Greek vocabulary and Grammar, in Egypt they kept the local people far from the decipherment procedure of the Egyptian Hieroglyphics and the unearthing of the Ancient Egyptian temples. Striking but true! For more than 100 years after Champollion was able to read and understand Egyptian Hieroglyphics, there was not a single Egyptian Egyptologist!

Contrarily to what studies were suggested for Greek students arriving in Paris, the Egyptians, who moved to the French capital and to other places of academic importance, were driven to studies of Arabic language with the guidance to shape out of it a modernized vernacular that would become the national medium of communication, exterminating

1. the existing linguistic pluralism

2. the linguistic amalgamations, and

3, the Coptic language.

This was most unnatural, because the Egyptians’ past had nothing to do with Arabic, but this was tactics was imposed because of the need of France to generate a medium of linguistic confusion that would avert any access to national identity awareness, to impose it throughout the country, and later on throughout other areas that were to be detached from the Ottoman Empire. Like this France would form a supposed Arabic nation, as counterweight to the Turks and the Islamic Caliphate.

If there had not been French involvement in Egypt, one of the various Coptic - Arabic - Ottoman Turkish amalgamated idioms would have been chosen by Egyptian intellectuals as basis of a national Neo-Coptic language and efforts of purification would have taken place, with the reintroduction of a sizeable part of Coptic vocabulary and the elimination of Arabic words. Te Neo-Coptic, written of course in Coptic and not in Arabic characters, would certainly have had Arabic words but its bulk would be Coptic, and the imposition of this language would generate a great interest for Egyptian National History, studies of Hieroglyphics, inclusion of Egyptian Hieroglyphic language and writing into the Secondary Education syllabuses (as Latin is taught in Italy and France, and Ancient Greek in Greece).

This would automatically would have signified a genuine possibility of development at all levels, and Egypt today would have been at the economic level of Balkan countries, which would have been quite normal, if we take into consideration that all these countries were at the same socioeconomic development level at the beginning of the 19th century. Like this, Egypt today would not have been a member state of the Arab League, and this organization would have never existed.

More importantly, Arabic would have been only a religious language learnt by a few religious people as it happens in Turkey. Like this, the work of the Wahhabist sheikhs to diffuse Satanism in the name of Islam, and to use fanaticized masses for their terrorist purposes would not have been carried out because they would not have been able to find supporters believing that Arabic is their national language, and the Neo-Coptic would have never been selected by the Wahhabist sheikhs as vehicle of their false Islamic theology. If today’s world has to deal with Ossama bin Laden, the only reason is the disastrous work of Napoleon and the French colonials in pulling Egypt and other countries to the falsehood of Arabization, and the criminal theory of Pan-Arabism.

Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

Also see

Nine years ago, the regime adopted the generalization of the Arab language

Arabization of the Amazigh lands


Posted Wed, 09/10/2008 - 19:01 by Jugurten

A repeated theme among anti-Amazigh propagandists is that the Amazigh identity was created by the French and that the Amazigh militants are traitors, working for the French. A common insult is to call the Amazigh “sons of the White Fathers,” referring to the missionary Roman Catholic priests that worked in the mountains of Kabylia under French colonialism. Certainly, French colonialism changed the dynamics of North Africa, particularly in Algeria, and the issue of identity has its roots in the divide-and-conquer strategy of the former colonialist power. But it was the Arab identity that was created due to this strategy, and the process was institutionalized under the post-independence regimes, which were influenced by the pan-arabist ideology of the former Egyptian president, Gamal Abdel Nasser.

Prior to French colonialism, Europeans referred to the area of North Africa as “Berberia”(1), recognizing that this was “Berber” land. Under colonialism, the area was called “L’Afrique Française du Nord” (French North Africa) and “Pays d’Atlas” (Land of the Atlas) by the French and “Africa Minor” by the Germans(2). In more ancient times, various names were used to refer to the area of North Africa or to parts of it, including: Afrikiyya, Libya, Numidia (central to eastern Algeria), Mauritanius (Morocco and western Algeria). At no time in history prior to the 20th century, was this area considered to be part of Arabia or Arab land. Under the French, the term Arab was used for the bedouins and as an insult. A look into a French or even English dictionary, will provide the meanings of “arab,” which includes a vagabond, or street urchin, in other words, someone without a settled residence. It was not always used literally, since the term was used to insult North Africans, sometimes followed by the word “dog.”

Despite the fact that Ottoman rule in Algeria was nominal, the military, government, and even culture of some of the cities had a Turkish character until the take-over of the French. There was even a term for the offspring of Ottoman Turks and Indigenous north Africans: Kouloughlis. The population also recognized Andalusians, descendants of the exiled Moors of Spain. The term “Moor,” itself, refers to the earlier designation of western North Africa by the Romans (Mauritanius). The French, however, created the dichotomy of Arab and Berber, a false dichotomy, which not only ignored the diversity of the land, but imposed a mythical identity. The French identification of Arabs, at least at first, referred to all nomadic plain-dwellers,(3) and the term “Berber” was used for the settled mountain-dwellers, which is misleading. For example, the Tuareg, a nomadic group, is Berber, not only having preserved its language and culture, but also its ancient writing style (Tifinagh). The French also used the term “Kabyle” in different ways in its early colonial history. At first, it was used for all the mountain dwellers they had not yet conquered, including those in Blida, “the Dahra and Ouarsenis ranges on either side of the Chelif river from Mostaganem in the West to Cherchell in the East, the Trara range near the moroccan border,” and the mountains of what is today known as Kabylia.(4) As the lands were conquered, the term “Kabyle” came to refer to a smaller part of the population, until it included only the people of today’s Greater and Lesser Kabylia. The term Kabyle was often used interchangeably with Berber, and no distinction was made at first between what we know today as Kabyles, Chaouis, etc. Nevertheless, these distinctions were created under the French and caused, or rather has caused, a confusion among readers, including scholars, about who the Berbers are. Much too often, Berber becomes synonymous with Kabyle, according to the latter’s current definition, and statistics undercount the populations because of this error. The 25-30% “berber population,” which is provided as the official Algerian statistic, is a result of the manipulation of this misconception, and thus, the number reflects only the population of Kabylia, ignoring the millions of berbers in Algiers, Blida, Tlemcen, Oran, Constantine, the Aures, and throughout Algeria. A similar problem has occured in Morocco, whose government officially recognizes 40 percent of the population as Berber (linguists recognize about 60 percent).

Together with the identification of people as Arab under the French, was the imposition of the Arabic language. In 1833, the French established the écoles arabes-françaises (French-Arabic school system). Until 1898, graduation tests were required in the Arabic language. While mostly Algerian Jews attended the schools and only an estimated 1,300 Muslims by 1870 (5), this created an elite class of Arabic-speakers. Arabic had heretofore been the religious literary language, and not the language of the streets. While Algerian (and other North African) “darja” (dialect) has a primarily Arabic vocabulary, its grammar and syntax is not Arabic but rather Tamazight. It is interesting to note that neither Ottoman and Persian are defined as Arabic dialects but languages in their own right, despite the use of Arabic characters and their majority Arabic vocabulary.

Although the French-Arabic schools were not popular among the majority of the indigenous population, in the 20th century, the movement begun in 1922 by Abd al-Hamid Ben Badis to “purify” Islam, or more accurately to easternize the religious beliefs and practices of Algeria, resulted in the growth of Qur’anic schools, which also taught Arabic. Although the French are depicted as anti-Islam, they controlled religious affairs under their ministry, and permitted, if not actually encouraged, the islamization and arabization of Algeria. Descriptions of the Berber laws and culture by French and British missionaries and anthropologists raise the question whether these people were, in fact, Muslim, as historians maintain, or if some Muslim terms and practices merely were incorporated into their own beliefs, influenced by the Ottomans, who were Sunni Muslims. The results of the combined islamization and arabization of North Africa is that today, the religion is equated with the language, considered holy and untouchable, despite the fact that the vast majority of Muslims are not Arabs, and Indonesians, Turks, Pakistanis, Iranians, and other non-Arab Muslims do not feel the need to define themselves as Arabs even if they are Muslim. In fact, they emphatically reject such an identification. Only in North Africa are the two equated.

After independence, arabization became more institutionalized. Arabic became the official language of all North African countries. In Algeria, this was an especially difficult transition since very few were actually literate in the language. Teachers had to be imported from Syria, Egypt, and Trans-Jordan. The Constitution defined the people as Arab and Muslim. Yet this was never the intent of the revolutionists who fought within Algeria. They had perceived a heterogenous Algeria, home to all Algerians, whatever their ethnicity or religion. With the murder of leading Amazigh revolutionists and the takeover by those who had studied, worked, or trained in Egypt, arabization became the official enforcement policy. Ben Bella, who made the infamous statement “We are arabs, we are arabs, we are arabs” (ironically in the French language) and Boumedienne, the first two presidents of Algeria, were both Berbers!

Despite the denial of the indigenous character of North Africa, of the root of its culture, its uniqueness, the maternal language of millions of its inhabitants, despite the virtual eradication of this identity in Tunisia and Libya and the ongoing struggle in Algeria and Morocco for full and official recognition of the Amazigh identity and language, human rights activists, academics, and the press refuse to call arabization by what it is: a racist policy of cultural genocide. None condemn the settlements and displacement of peoples to arabize these countries; yet, this is an ongoing process in both Morocco and Algeria. While the governments say they recognize that their countries is Amazigho-Arab and that Tamazight is permitted, the fact is that anything related to the Amazigh, including the language, music, art, etc., is relegated to the folkloric, to the “traditional,” painting anything related to Amazighity as archaic and nostalgic, rather than a living, breathing, developing reality. The limits are placed to bar Amazighity from becoming a practical and modern identity, from the Tamazight language being capable of official use, with the incorporation of modern, scientific terms, needed for any language to be viable. For this reason, all work in standardizing and modernizing Tamazight must be done from abroad by the diaspora. In the artistic field, few recognize that there is Amazigh music that is as modern as any pop, alternative, or metal music we hear today, its tunes being far from those traditionally played at weddings and other celebrations, and its words dealing with topics from the Amazigh struggle to romantic love. And while pictures of traditional wear and Berbers struggling in poverty are commonplace and popular due to its “exotic” flavor, the modern professional or blue-collar Amazigh, a more common and realistic portrayal, is invisible to most of the international community.

It is time—long past overdue—to confront the racist arabization of the Amazigh lands.

by Blanca Madani

- 1. Humbaraci, Arslan. Algeria: A Revolution that Failed. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1966, p. 10.
- 2. Ibid.
- 3. Lorcin, Patricia M. Imperial Identities: Sterotyping, Prejudice and Race in Colonial Algeria. London: I.B. Tauris Publishers, 1999, p. 2.
- 4. Ibid, p 5.
- 5. Ruedy, John. Modern Algeria: The Origins and Development of a Nation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992, p. 104.

added by Leslie White

Uploaded by dadamazigh

[NOTE: Better when viewed at the original site: ]

and a

Azul fell-awen
The solution is in the autonomy of Kabylia, please take a time to look this video :

Movement for autonomy of Kabylia -The Police Of Zerhouni

MAK (Movement for autonomy of Kabylia*) Release
- The Police Of Zerhouni
Thursday 9 October 2008, by Zorro

On Monday, September 22 nd, 2008, the Algerian police department has made a raid into a library in Tizi Wuzu where members of World Amazigh Congress (CMA) were holding a press coference .An ardent and arrogant police chief with his escort have conducted a raid of shame, he stood up in the middle of the place and ordered the Moroccans Amazigh among the Kabylians to follow him to the police building without any given explanation.

Instead of conducting their swoop operations on the offenders that plunder the city and commit their crimes in a daytime, instead of enforcing the law against the illegal trades everywhere on the pedestrian sidewalks throughout the city; instead of working or elaborating an advanced plan against suicide bombers attacks, the Algerian police has its focus on an international non governmental organization members that are legally in the country.

Their aim is clear, in acting that way, the Algerian authorities unsuccessfully want to show a powerless kabylia to any foreigner who, by his/her visits expresses his/her sympathy to that tormented and suffering region, as the members of the World Amazigh Congress quickly understood the government intentions and willing to come back as many times as required.

Concerning the antiterrorism defensive measures, the police show a suspicious inactivity, to give an example, on June 6, 2008 around 6:30 pm that means in daytime, terrorists have been firing on the police building for 30 min (in a village called Ath- Wassif in kabylia) and the members of the police force preferred to hide inside . Results: one civilian injured. The local population, for a longtime witnessing civilians assassinations and an overbearing pride from the Islamic terrorism, hoped to feel safer after the recent settlement of the new police force, sooner the hope has turned into illusion, when the village residents noticed that their safety is not a priority for the interior minister Yazid Zerhouni.

The Movement for the Autonomy of Kabylia (MAK), without interfering in the internal divergences of the pattern, expresses its full sympathy to the World Amazigh Congress members and its entire availability to contribute with all its resources and forces to ensure better and safer conditions for a healthy progress of this international NGO (Non governmental organization) that shares some of MAK objectives. This government isolation and humiliation of Kabylia reinforces the firmness of the MAK to work hard more than ever in order to make kabylia a home of freedom, democracy, secularism, fraternity and sympathy.

September 23, 2008

For the MAK, chairman


Translated from French by L.F Aksel Source kabylia
* Kabylia
Arabic: qabīla
Berber: Tamurt Idurar
Other spellings: Kabylie; The Kabyle
Mountain area in northeastern Algeria, principally along the coast, between the capital Algiers and Bejaïa, equalling a stretch of about 200 km.The Kabylia stretches from the coast to the hinterland of about 125 km inland from the Mediterranean Sea. Normally the Kabylia is divided into two areas, the Djurdjura or Jurjura, or the Larger Kabylias, to the west; and the Small Kabylia to the east. The mountains of the Larger Kabylias reach summits of 2,000 metres, while the highest summits of the Small Kabylia reach about 1,200 metres.The terrain of the Kabylias is one of the wildest of North Africa, with rugged mountains, and isolated valleys. Through large parts of the year, many areas are inaccessible because of snowfall and rain.The isolation of Kabylia has given birth to a strong independent cultural feeling, where the Berber people of the region do not speak Arabic, but a Berber dialect named Kabyle. And it is French that is their second language.

Thursday, October 16, 2008


Fitzgerald: The "root causes" of Islamic disarray

Arabs and Muslims, it has been said, cling to their past. And it’s true: they do cling to "their" past, as long as that past is the past that came after the pre-Islamic past that went before, which is merely one long Jahiliyya, or Time of Ignorance. There is no real interest in that past, though one will find the Iraqi peacock-proud that "civilization started here" -- but he won't know about that "civilization." He won't have been part of the discovery and recovery and study of that "civilization" -- Ur and Babylon and Assyria. For that was a Western thing, a thing that Western Infidels, from Henry Austen Layard to Leonard Woolley, undertook. Copts in Egypt are a very different matter, because they know, even if they do not always say aloud, that they are the true inheritors of Egypt's civilization. They are the ones linked continuously back to Egypt's pre-Islamic civilization, including the language that existed before the Arabs arrived and came, in fits and starts, to reduce the Coptic percentage of the population. Massed forcible conversions were not unknown, especially in certain centuries when a ruler would be particularly aggressive in "spreading" the "truth" of Islam.

Islam is, as has been written here before, "history-haunted." It has to be. It has to be in order to make up for the obviously miserable actual state of Muslims, their civilizational disarray, their primitiveness in everything that should matter and by which civilizations are judged -- and that excludes the trillions of dollars in unmerited oil revenues, and will continue to exclude them, no matter how many Western skyscrapers and companies and luxury goods and palaces at home those trillions buy.

Instead, they look back to a mythical past, of highly exaggerated glories: the wonders of Old Fustat (Cairo), the splendors of Baghdad. In this narrative, the non-Muslims who contributed so much to what there was are not recognized. It's an "Islamic science" and "Islamic civilization" -- when, in fact, if you take away many who were Christians or Jews or Zoroastrians, or if they were not, if they had converted to Islam, then they were only one or two generations removed from being Christians or Jews or Zoroastrians, the numbers of non-Muslims were still sufficient to ensure that the milieu would not be bleakly Islamic in the first few hundred years after the initial Islamic conquests.

But now, because of the behavior of the Muslims themselves, they have been emptying out their lands of non-Muslims. The Jews -- who, for example, constituted a third, an important enlivening third, of the population of Baghdad in the 1920s -- are all gone, driven out, or killed. The Christians hang on, here and there, but they were killed en masse in Iraq -- 100,000 Assyrians massacred -- after the British left in 1932, and the exodus of the past few years, in response to the Islamic terror, has led to a dimidiation of Christian numbers, with more decreases to come. In Egypt, the Copts hang on, and even exhibit, at times, the usual depressing phenomenon of islamochristian attitudes when, with Muslims in power and of course vigilantly observing, they cannot complain as they would like about their status, and they often must parrot the party-line about Israel -- while they are held captive to Muslim masters in Egypt. When they attain freedom in the West, they can and are more candid, less frightened, less wary.

And of course all those Levantines -- those Greeks and Italians, as well as those Armenians and Jews and other nationalities, once made Cairo and Alexandria more interesting places, where in high-ceilinged coffee rooms, with newspapers including locally-produced French and English language newspapers, one could sit and read and talk to one's friends and play cards or possibly tric-trac. And now I find myself practically writing some Farouk-era scene -- or back, back further, to the last days of Lord Cromer -- for the script of some movie, to be filmed by some Egyptian director, full of nostalgia (see "The Yacoubian Building") for those Italians, and Greeks, and Jews and Armenians, and all the others, including British subjects, who were booted out by Nasser, and all of their property seized (that had been slowly amassed over many generations).

No, Ungaretti and Cavafy were both born in Alexandria. But there won't be any more ungarettis or cavafys coming out of Egypt. There won't, similarly, be much coming out of Baghdad. No latter-day mutannabis from a Muslim-only land will be coming out of a culture that thinks of poetry now as merely an extension of propaganda -- see Adonis on the state of "Arabic literature" (he says angrily that "there is no Arabic literature" but only propagandistic trash). Nor will they be coming out of the Maghreb, now that the French (and others -- Spanish, Italians, Jews) left Algeria, and Morocco, and Tunisia. The wasteland that Islam creates is obvious to all. That is why Muslims themselves keep harking back to some earlier time, some time when things were so different, their books exaggeratedly tell them (the Self-Esteem problems of an entire civilization is a difficult task to deal with), and they were sitting on top of the world.

But one wants to say, as one looks over the past thousand years or so of Muslim history, and failure to produce -- see the West, see the East (the real East) -- to the Islamic world, something like:

What Have You Done For Us Lately?

And then one would like to go further, and see how many of the most advanced people who were born into Islam and live in that world, can begin to catch a hint of a glimmer of why it is that Islam itself prevents the enterprise of science. Its view is that the individual is unimportant and merely part of a collective, the Umma, or Community of Believers, a mentally submissive Believer who must be a "slave of Allah" and never dare to question the rules set down by Allah (and derived by Islamic scholars from the Qur'an, as glossed by the contents of the Sunnah). A believer must be punished for any display of free and skeptical inquiry, which prevents the enterprise of science (though not of technology, not for example of computer engineering or certain kinds of medical practice -- but not scientific research, unless undertaken in the West, by someone who though nominally a Muslim, has become only a "cultural Muslim"). And art, the varieties of artistic expression that are simply haram in Islam -- all sculpture, and depictions in paint, or drawings, of living creatures, and most music, so that one is left with calligraphy and architecture.

All of this, at some point, intelligent Muslims and Arabs are going to have to recognize, little by little, and some are even going to have to discuss it openly. And that will be made easier for them if we Infidels show that we are perfectly at ease in recognizing that the political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual failures of Muslim states and societies, polities and peoples, are connected to the texts, and tenets, and attitudes naturally arising from those tenets, of Islam itself.

If we show that we not only can laughingly reject the nonsense about how the "root causes" of Islamic disarray, and violence, and aggression, and failures, have something to do with us and everything to do with them, and what's more, if we can articulate it (though never as well as the defectors from Islam are able to do, for they know where every little secret lies, and we don't), that is the only way to bring about the kind of "change" that makes sense in the Arab and Muslim world.

Posted by Hugh at October 6, 2008 2:47 PM

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

The End of the Caliphate - and the dreams of ever reviving it

excerpt from Jean-Pierre Filiu's "Ghost of the caliphate"

When Atatürk abolished the caliphate in 1924, two years after toppling the Ottoman sultanate, he deprived the Sunni world of an undisputed guiding voice. Sharif Hussein of Mecca immediately tried to fill this void, but he was smashed by the rising power of Wahhabi Islam. Saudi Arabia was built on the ruins of this aborted caliphate, although its monarchs do not now claim a nobler title than "custodian of the holy places." Nowadays, to be called "commander of the believers" one has to be the king of Morocco, or Mullah Omar of Afghanistan, who assumed the title when, in Kandahar in 1996, he took up a cloak said to have belonged to the Prophet himself as a founding gesture for the Taliban emirate. The only Muslim leader who plays publicly with the notion of caliphate is Colonel Gaddafi, who recently saw in it the solution for trans-Saharan integration. The concept of caliph is rather flexible: its Arabic etymology just means "successor" and its institution was a pragmatic response by the nascent Muslim community to the trauma of Muhammad's sudden death.

When it comes to politics, there was never a golden age of Islam. Out of the four so-called "well-inspired" caliphs who followed the Prophet, three were murdered and, during their time, the bloody struggle for leadership ignited a civil war whose echoes are still felt today in the streets of Baghdad and Beirut. The road back to the caliphate is a dead end but, as often with global war and global jihad, the layers of propaganda surrounding it lend an appearance of substance to an illusion. Let us hope not too many people will fall under the spell of this ghost.

Prospect MagazineIssue 140 , November 2007

ZARATHUSHTRA: Prophet and founder

Monday, October 13, 2008

When Islam extinguished the sacred fire of Zarathushtra - Caliph Omar's Ultimatum to Persian King, Yazdgird III and the King's Response

Text of the ultimatum from Omar Ibn-Khat'tab the Calif of Islam to the Iranina Sovereign, Yazdgerd III:

Bism-ellah Ar'rahman Ar'rhim To the Shah of the Fars

I do not foresee a good future for you and your nation save your acceptance of my terms and your submission to me. There was a time when your country ruled half the world, but see how now your sun has set. On all fronts your armies have been defeated and your nation is condemned to extinction. I point out to you the path whereby you might escape this fate. Namely, that you begin worshipping the one god, the unique deity, the only god who created all that is. I bring you his message. Order your nation to cease the false worship of fire and to join us, that they may join the truth.

Worship Allah the creator of the world. Worship Allah and accept Islam as the path of salvation. End now your polytheistic ways and become Muslims that you may accept Allah-u-Akbar as your savior. This is the only way of securing your own survival and the peace of your Persians. You will do this if you know what is good for you and for your Persians. Submission is your only option. Allah u Akbar.

The Calif of Muslims Omar Ibn-Khat'tab


Response of the Persian King:

In the name of Ahuramazda, the Creator of Life and Wisdom.

From the Shahan-Shah of Iran Yazdgerd to Omar Ibn Khat'tab the Arab Calif. In your letter you summon us Iranians to your god whom you call "Allah-u-Akbar"; and because of your barbarity and ignorance, without knowing who we are and Whom we worship, you demand that we seek out your god and become worshippers of "Allah-u-Akbar".

How strange that you occupy the seat of the Arab Caliph but are as ignorant as any desert roaming Arab! You admonish me to become monotheistic in faith. Ignorant man, for thousands of years we Aryaee have, in this land of culture and art, been monotheistic and five times a day have we offered prayers to God's Throne of Oneness. While we laid the foundations of philanthropy and righteousness and kindness in this world and held high the ensign of "Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds", you and your ancestors were desert wanderers who ate snakes and lizards and buried your innocent daughters alive.

You Arabs who have no regard for God's creatures, who mercilessly put people to the sword, who mistreat your women and bury you daughters alive, who attack caravans and are highway robbers, who commit murder, who kidnap women and spouses; how dare you presume to teach us, who are above these evils, to worship God?

You tell me to cease the worship of fire and to worship God instead! To us Iranians the light of Fire is reminiscent of the Light of God. The radiance and the sun-like warmth of fire exuberates our hearts, and the pleasant warmth of it brings our hearts and spirits closer together, that we may be philanthropic, kind and considerate, that gentleness and forgiveness may become our way of life, and that thereby the Light of God may keep shining in our hearts.

Our God is the Great Ahuramazda. Strange is this that you too have now decided to give Him a name, and you call Him by the name of "Allah-u-Akbar".

But we are nothing like you. We, in the name of Ahuramazda, practice compassion and love and goodness and righteousness and forgiveness, and care for the dispossessed and the unfortunate; But you, in the name of your "Allah-u-Akbar" commit murder, create misery and subject others to suffering! Tell me truly who is to blame for your misdeeds? Your god who orders genocide, plunder and destruction, or you who do these things in his name? Or both?

You, who have spent all your days in brutality and barbarity, have now come out of your desolate deserts resolved to teach, by the blade and by conquest, the worship of God to a people who have for thousands of years been civilized and have relied on culture and knowledge and art as mighty supports.

What have you, in the name of your "Allah-u-Akbar", taught these armies of Islam besides destruction and pillage and murder that you now presume to summon others to your god?

Today, my people's fortunes have changed. Their armies, who were subjects of Ahuramazada, have now been defeated by the Arab armies of "Allah-u-Akbar". And they are being forced, at the point of the sword, to convert to the god by the name of "Allah-u-Akbar". And are forced to offer him prayers five times a day but now in Arabic; since your "Allah-u-Akbar" only understands Arabic.

I advise you to return to your lizard infested deserts. Do not let loose upon our cities your cruel barbarous Arabs who are like rabid animals. Refrain from the murder of my people. Refrain from pillaging my people. Refrain from kidnapping our daughters in the name of your "Allah-u-Akbar". Refrain from these crimes and evils.

We Aryaee are a forgiving people, a kind and well-meaning people. Wherever we go, we sow the seeds of goodness, amity and righteousness. And this is why we have the capacity to overlook the crimes and the misdeeds of your Arabs.

Stay in your desert with your "Allah-u-Akbar", and do not approach our cities; for horrid is your belief and brutish is your conduct.

Yazdgerd Saasaani

Saturday, October 11, 2008

The Battle of Tours (Poitiers) Revisited

.1276 years ago Charles Martel (the Hammer) and his Franks turned back the Saracen (Mohammedans) and kept them from taking over France and the rest of Europe

October 11, 2008
Raymond Ibrahim's "Today in History": Charles the Hammer saves the West from Islam at Tours

Precisely 100 years of Islamic conquests after Muhammad's death (632), the Muslims, starting from Arabia, found themselves in Gaul, modern day France, confronting a hitherto little known people—the Christian Franks. There, on October 11th, 732, one of the most decisive battles between Christendom and Islam took place, demarcating the extent of the latter’s conquests, and ensuring the survival of the former.

From and Continued at

Thursday, October 9, 2008

"Islamo-Fascism" or is it just plain Islam as mandated in the koran?


Rick Santorum: Is the average American going to be afraid of a guy living in a cave, we haven’t seen in six years -- that he’s going to destroy the United States of America? No.

There was a story that General Franks, Tommy Franks, told me soon after the war. He told me that about a year after the attacks of 9/11, he had an opportunity to be with the President. The President, for the first year or so after the war, would on occasion refer to the terrorists as cowards. He would call them cowards. And General Franks had an opportunity to talk to the President; said, “Mr. President, you know, you refer to these terrorists as cowards.” He said, “Mr. President, they may be many things, but they are not cowards. These are people who are willing to die for what they believe in. So they are not cowards. But more importantly, by calling them cowards, you tell the American public something very wrong.” Who is afraid of a coward? Who believes a coward will defeat us?

Words matter. How you define things matter, particularly in this war. Why? Because there will be no clean victories. So the path will be harder. It will take much more understanding for the American public to understand this. And they simply don’t.

And so I spent a whole lot of time trying to convince the President to do this. And as David mentioned, he did it one time -- he said the word “Islamic fascism” one time, about three days after I gave my last lecture to him about using that word. He did it, if you recall, the day the British foiled a plot where a group of people were going to blow up airlines coming across from Britain to the United States, 10 airliners. And he was asked at a press briefing a question, and he referred to the enemy as Islamic fascists.

There was a raft of stories. People were saying, “Ah, the President’s redefined the war.” I got -- I can’t tell you, because I’d just given a speech on it, saying the President needed to do this. My phone was ringing off the hook. “Have you convinced the President to change focus?” Well, three days later, he ended up going to the State Department. And at the State Department, rumor has it, he was confronted by senior-level administration officials at the State Department. And he was told that if he used the term “fascism” and “Islam” together, he would destroy the coalition of Islamic supporters that we have around the world. He would anger Muslims throughout the world and in this country; would incite more anti-American activity; and he has to never use that term again. And he never has since.

And as a result, we have a country that is walking through this war, just looking at blood and destruction, and not knowing why it’s happening. So what I’ve decided to do is to go out, and I’ve formed a project at a think-tank, Ethics in Public Policy. And I wanted to talk about this and one other thing that I noticed.

During the end of my campaign, I noticed there was something else going on; something else that I found rather disturbing. It was in a growing alliance between this radical group of Islamacists, particularly Iran, and people in Central and South America, Venezuela, Nicaragua now, Ecuador, Bolivia, and North Korea and other places -- that these alliances were forming. And no one was talking about it. In fact, we were ignoring it. You saw the United Nations, when Hugo Chavez got up and called the President a devil. And the American left and the college campuses -- they just loved that. Then Ahmadinejad got up, and he was excoriating the President; again, the American left -- they just loved this. Right before the election, it was great. They were tearing the President apart, showing, again, lack of respect for the President. But what I saw was something different. What I saw was a growing alliance that really disturbed me. So I went out and started to talk about that.

And for me, it was like -- I don’t play chess very well. But what I do know is that if you’re really a good chess player, as the game goes on, you can sort of see what’s going to happen. You can sort of see the moves and counter-moves. And you sort of having a feeling of how this thing’s going to end. Well, that’s sort of how I see this. There’s a lot of moves and counter-moves going on around the world. And I think I have a feeling -- an eerie one -- of how it may turn out.

We have an array of enemies against us. The one is Islamic fascism. But what we haven’t done is explain to you that there is not one brand of Islamic fascism. We tend to paint them as -- for simplicity’s sake -- as, you know, everybody in jihad. But there are two different sects, of Sunnis and Shia, and they believe two fundamentally different things; not theologically. Their theology is both based on the Koran. It’s not like Protestants and Catholics, where they have theological differences in the Koran. They have historical differences as who’s the rightful leader of Islam, which leads them to fight for power as opposed to theology.

The Sunnis want to reestablish a Kalifat. For a thousand years, Sunni Islam fought Christendom -- a thousand years. And in fact, for most of the time, won; for the most of the time, was on the offensive. It wasn’t till the late 17th century that Islam was stopped. And it was stopped at the gates of Vienna, in the heart of Europe, in Austria. The siege of Vienna -- the second siege of Vienna in 1683 -- that ultimately was the highwater mark of Islam.

Does anybody know when the highwater mark of Islam was? September the 11th, 1683. It was the very next day, on the plains of Vienna, that Christendom -- the Holy League, it was called -- united. All of Europe, with the exception of -- anybody want to guess? France, right, you got it. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

But with the exception of France, we conquered -- they conquered -- the Sunnis, and drove them into finally a treaty in 1699. And for 300 years, they have been silent. Why? Because they didn’t have the resources or the technology to compete with the modern world. For 300 years, they lay silent.

But now Sunni Islam, through al-Qaeda, which is Sunni; through resources, known as oil; through technology that is now off-the-shelf, and through frustration -- imagine you’re a Muslim. You are the person who has the faith that is the successor to the two incomplete faiths -- Judaism and Christianity. You are the final revelation. You are the one that is going to control the world. You are the one for a thousand years dominated the world. And for 300 years, you sit in a backwater, looking at Christendom thrive, while you sit in squalor and poverty. How can this be?

And so, strains of Islam started to come, like Wahhabism, that adopted tactics of the modern world, grafted them onto Islam in a corrupted way, and are now projecting itself through these terrorist organizations.

This is what we fight. They want to reconquer the world. They want to establish a new Kalifat that was eliminated by Turkey 100 years ago; by Atatürk. That’s one -- and by the way, it’s not just al-Qaeda. It is terrorist groups and nation-states that support these terrorist groups, like Saudi Arabia, all over the world.

Then you have the Shias. But they’re a minority. They were -- up until the late 1970s, they were considered the peaceful Muslims. They didn’t fight -- most of these wars, they didn’t participate and fight. They didn’t believe -- their history tells them, you know, that they’re not to establish a Kalifat. They are to wait to the return of the Mahdi, the return of the Twelfth Imam. It is only till then that they will establish reign in the rest of the world. And they are to wait until then. They are not to govern until the Mahdi returns. That’s what Shias believe.

So you say, Well, then, why do they now govern Iran? Why do they now take arms against us via Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations? Well, that’s thanks to a man named Ayatollah Khomeini, who has taken some of the roots of the modern world, and some of the roots of Sunni Islam, and grafted them onto the Shia religion -- which in my mind makes the Shia brand of Islamist extremists even more dangerous than the Sunni [version].

Why? Because the ultimate goal of the Shia brand of Islamic Islam is to bring back the Mahdi. And do you know when the Mahdi returns? At the Apocalypse at the end of the world. You see, they are not interested in conquering the world; they are interested in destroying the world.

Now I would suspect -- I could be wrong -- but I would suspect that some of you, if not most of you, had never heard any of this. And that’s the crime. Because we’ve been at war with these people, particularly in Iran, since 1979. And we have been in armed conflict with them for the last five years. And America has no knowledge of who we fight, and why they fight us. And thus, they despair.

So it is important for all of you to know who we fight. You are in the seeds of academia. They will never tell you who we fight. But you need to know. And you need to educate.

But it’s not just radical Islam; it is also the radical left. Because what we’re seeing now is the old adage you learned when you were a kid -- the enemy of my enemy is my friend. And the left -- whether it’s here in this country, and certainly around the world -- sees America today as the enemy. They fight us on college campuses, and they fight us in the streets of Central and South American countries, in North Korea, in other places.

You’re seeing an alliance grow. There was just an announcement this past week -- there is now nonstop service, airplane service, between Karakus and Tehran. Interesting destination. You’re seeing Venezuela, under Hugo Chavez, sign a defense pact with Iran, start a $2 billion anti-American fund for Central and South America, spend more money on arms than any other country -- foreign arms sales -- than any other country in the world, create a million-person army, spending $30 billion to build forts, and [has] aligned country with Evo Morales in Bolivia to build forts -- where? On the border of Chile, on the border of Peru, on the border of Brazil and Argentina and Colombia; facing toward those countries. And who is going to be in those forts? Yes, there’ll be Bolivian troops. But the officers in charge will be Cuban and Venezuelan.

He has made it very clear -- the left is coming back. He has already, as you’ve seen, nationalized the telecommunications company, he’s nationalized the oil industries, he’s shutting down all the free press, all the television networks that don’t agree with him. And he is funding democratic elections. He’s funding the Communist candidates, like Daniel Ortega, who just won in Nicaragua, so they can take over. He is the new Castro, except he has one advantage that Castro never had -- oil. He has the money to do what Castro could never do.

And so isn’t it interesting that the radical left and radical Islam, who have very little ideologically in common, would join together? They see the soft underbelly of America, just like the Soviet Union did. And they’re going after it. And we stand by and ignore it.

We laugh at this man Chavez and consider him a buffoon. I remind you, we laughed at Hitler. And we laughed at Khrushchev when he pounded his shoe on the table at the United Nations. These little men, these idiots -- they are neither. They are dangers and threats to the United States of America.

So this is what we are up against. And unfortunately, we see the United States standing on the sideline, or at least, when it comes to Central and South America. And now potentially, when it comes to radical Islam holding back or retreating from the fight -- you know, Winston Churchill once said that -- in his book, “The Gathering Storm,” he said, in the subtitle, “How the English-speaking peoples through their unwisdom, carelessness and good nature allowed the wicked to rearm.”

And so it is today. We are sitting back. We are debating whether we are going to confront this evil. And let me assure you, they are not going to go away. That’s what the left will tell you. That’s what the Democrats will say. If we pull back, they’ll leave us alone. If we pull back -- let themselves work it out -- it is not a concern to us.

Well, the American public believes this. Why? Because they don’t know better. We have to teach them. Teach them. The President of the United States has to turn from the Commander in Chief to the Educator in Chief, and so does everybody else who believes in this cause.

And so that’s why I’ve decided to do what I have led out to do. And let me teach you some things that I think are important, not just to describe who the enemy is and what the problem is, but to offer something that is difficult, which is hope.

But I say this with this proviso, with this caveat -- this will be a long war. This will -- remember, when they had the technological ability to fight us, they did, for a thousand years. A thousand years. This is hard for us to understand -- a country scantly 250 years of age. A thousand years is incomprehensible to us. It is not to them. It is not to them. Their history is that history.

And they know their history. They know who they are. They know who we are. And we have no idea who they are.

What must we do to win? We must educate, engage, evangelize and eradicate.

Let me -- on the education side, this is -- people have likened this to World War II; that, you know, we’re sort of not getting it, like we didn’t get -- this is more like the Cold War. This is more like -- at the beginning of the threat of Communism, the Americans didn’t get it. And so there were all sorts of organizations, many on college campuses, that organized to educate the American public about the threat of Communism, about that ideology. The American left wasn’t going to do it; they were sympathetic. Hollywood wasn’t going to do it; they were sympathetic.

We need to do it. We need to educate. We need to define the enemy.

I have -- my staff, toward the end of my campaign -- if I ever said the word war on terror, we’re fighting terrorism or terrorists, I’d have to put a dollar in -- that used to be a quarter -- it was a dollar in the jar. Stop using that term. Never say war on terror, never say we’re fighting terrorists. Because we’re not.

They are in a whole new war with us. We can choose not to be in one; doesn’t mean we aren’t. We are in a war, and theology is its basis. Just like we were in a war against Communism, and ideology was its basis. We need to understand that.

We need to do more, as I said, to spread the ideas throughout your campuses, but you also have to explain to people what losing looks like. Because people don’t think we can lose to these folks.

What losing looks like is pretty easy, in my mind. Look at Europe. Europe is on the way to losing. The most popular male name in Belgium -- Mohammad. It’s the fifth most popular name in France among boys. They are losing because they are not having children, they have no faith, they have nothing to counteract it. They are balkanizing Islam, but that’s exactly what they want. And they’re creating an opportunity for the creation of Eurabia, or Euristan in the future. At their current population trends of Europeans having children -- of Westernized Europeans, not Islamic Europeans -- European population will be half of what it is today in 32 years. Europe will not be in this battle with us. Because there will be no Europe left to fight.

That’s what part of this will look like. The rest will be for them to control all of the oil revenues, for them to control all the other things that are important to making economies go, and drive us to our knees economically. This is not beyond the realm of possibility.

And there are many other ways through technology that they can attack us, without having to blow up bombs in New York City or Washington, D.C.

That’s what losing looks like. It looks like being alone and isolated, and without freedom and opportunity.

The second thing we have to do is engage the American people. You know, one of the things that we have not done is tell the American people what they can do to help. I think one of the things we can do is engage the American left.

On your college campuses, engage the feminists. Here’s how you do it. Have joint left-right -- no, wait a minute -- have joint feminist-College Republican symposium on how Islam treats women. Bring in women from the Islamic world who have escaped from the radical Islamic world, to talk about honor killings and mutilation, and polygamy, and all the other horrific things that happen to women in the Islamic world. Challenge them, in their own roots, to stand up and fight against something that they say that they’re against.

Have a joint symposium with the gay and lesbian organizations on college campuses. And talk about how Islam treats homosexuals. Talk about how they treat anybody who is found to be a homosexual, and the answer to that is, they kill them. Talk about why they’re not standing up and fighting for what they say they believe in, in fighting radical Islam.

You have an opportunity to shine light where there is now just heat. Engage them. We need to engage America. We need to engage America on energy. The President is trying to do that. I remind you, without oil, we wouldn’t be here. Without oil, there wouldn’t be a problem. We have to do something about our energy independence, and we need to engage the American people.

Evangelize. Now I don’t mean convert Muslims into Christians. But one of the things we do need to do is appeal to moderate Muslims. Christianity went through this. Christianity did not always -- even though the Bible said so -- separate church and state. The Bible was -- Jesus was very clear -- give unto Caesar what’s to Caesar and to God what is to God. But that was not practiced for hundreds, if not over a thousand years. The church and the state were one after the Emperor Constantine, for a long time, in many countries.

And so, we need to explain to them how we went through our change, our modernization of the faith, to allow religious pluralism. We need to engage. And that means you need to engage. Engage your Muslim club on campus. Ask them -- have a symposium about how we can achieve religious pluralism. And --

Unidentified Audience Member: [inaudible]

Rick Santorum: The other thing we need to do is eradicate, and that’s the final thing. As I said, this is going to be a long war. There are going to be pluses and minuses, ups and downs. But we have to win this war to -- fight this war to win this war. We cannot sit back and think that these folks are going to go away, because they simply will not.

We have to improve our intelligence. It is still woeful. The idea that we have absolutely no idea -- which we do not -- whether Iran is close to a bomb or not is just absolutely unacceptable. Our intelligence community is still in a woeful state. It is not allowing us to defend ourselves.

We need to improve. We need to get better. We need to take on one major threat. And the President is moving toward it, contrary to what everybody in the Administration says. And I think he’s moving toward it for the right reason -- because we cannot tolerate it. And that is we cannot tolerate the continuance of that government that is in control of Iran.

And I’m not suggesting that we have to go in there and blow them up. But I would tell you this -- there’s an article -- fact, a great article -- today in the Wall Street Journal by Michael Ledeen. And I would encourage you to get it.

The answer is you, the equivalent of you in Iran. Over -- I think it’s about half the people in Iran are under the age of 30. This is a young country. This is a country of young people that is not particularly crazy -- the majority are not crazy about the ruling regime.

We are doing nothing -- let me underscore this -- we are doing nothing to help the dissonants in Iran revolt and turn that country back to a real democracy. We are doing nothing, in part because of the State Department’s desire to negotiate with Iran and the CIA’s desire to stay out of the way of Iran.

I mean, think about this. You’ve heard about these EFPs, these new projectiles that we found that were made in Iran, that are being used against our troops? And these EFPs -- and you think -- well, I don’t know if you’ve seen the pictures, these little -- looks like little copper bowl, little copper dish. You think, Well, you know, what’s the big deal? Little copper dish. I’ve seen pictures of Abrams tanks -- not Humvees, not up-armored Humvees -- but Abrams tanks that get hit with one of these things, these little cylinders that won’t look like much. They look like a tin can after some maniac, you know, crushed it against his head. It’s unbelievable what these things do.

And Iran is behind it. And guess what? We have known for years that Iran has been behind providing weapons and logistics to the Shia and Sunni insurgents. They don’t care who kills each other, as long as they’re destabilizing Iraq.

So a radical Shiite regime is funding al-Qaeda, who doesn’t like radical Shiites. Why? Because they just want to defeat us. They want to defeat democracy.

We’ve known this -- our intel people have known this for years. But Congress didn’t know it. I can tell you for a fact. I stood in briefing after briefing, after I got word from troops and others that Iran was helping kill our troops in Iraq, and I went to briefings, classified briefings, asking if that was true and was repeatedly told no. And I think I know why. Because if they told us it was true, if they told the President it was true, then we’d have to do something about it. And the CIA didn’t want us to do anything. Because they didn’t have any good alternatives for us to do.

Now, we have to change the government of Iran. And it will be a tough thing to do, but we need to do it.

Let me just -- let me close with one of my favorite quotes, as I think about the times that we’re going through. It’s a quote by Sir Winston Churchill. It was given in June of 1940, June of 1940, a year and a half before the United States would get into World War II. “What General Weygand called the Battle of France is over. I expect the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilization. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of our enemy will soon be turned upon us. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us therefore brace ourselves to do our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will say, ‘This is their finest hour.’”

Tom Brokaw called that generation of Americans the greatest generation. Yet, remember, it was a year and a half after Europe fell that this greatest generation halted hesitantly, and ultimately didn’t get involved until we were ourselves attacked. In the face of this great evil across the ocean, [inaudible] of this lethal evil, this greatest generation of Americans said no to combating it. As our closest ally was being bombed into oblivion, we stood on the sideline.

What we’re experiencing here in America is nothing new. Americans don’t like war. They don’t like suffering and dying. No one does. If this is to be our greatest and finest hour, we, like Britain, will be alone. We, unlike Britain, will be scorned and ridiculed by everyone else around the world for doing it. Unlike World War II, this war will not last a year or two or three or four. This will be a long war. This will take more from your generation than even the greatest generation gave America.

It may have been Britain’s finest hour, even during the years of ‘41 to ‘45. World War II may have been America’s finest hour. But it was not, and is not, our greatest challenge. Your generation, the young people sitting right here before me, are the ones who will have to shoulder the burden of what I believe will be the beginning of the greatest struggle the West has ever seen.

The question is, will we have the wisdom, the courage and the perseverance to answer this call? I pray, and I ask you all to pray, to God that we do.

Thank you, and God bless you.