Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Inside The New Military Mind


I say new military mind, because the old military mind was trained to win wars. The new military mind is trained to win friends and (as Sarah Palin says) "play hopey changey "with our enemies.

By de Andréa

Somewhere in the first paragraph of the war college manual, it states, as part of the very foundation of war, to “know your enemy”. know who your enemy is’…

Inside the new American military mind is something that prevents us from ever winning this war against the Nation of Islam. Because it prevents us from ever knowing just who this enemy really is.

The new politically correct - multi-cultural religion of the west idealisticlly cultivates the concept of group-hugs and that we can all learn to get along if we just learn to accept each other.

The concepts of the Reagan doctrine, “Peace through strength” and “Trust but verify” are ridiculed as war mongers and hate crimes. If we had followed the doctrine of political correctness during the Second World War we would be a divided country today. West of the Mississippi would be part of the country of Japan and east of the giant river would be under German Nazi dictatorship, as well as all of Europe, Asia, and Africa.

President Truman won and ended the war with Japan with the obvious threat of complete genocide of the Japanese people and their country; as a result today we still have peace with Japan.

Peace through war.
The concept of peace through war is now nothing but an underling memory of days gone by. The thing of it is, history is about days gone by. Moreover, no where in history has lasting peace ever been negotiated. But as in the Freudian theory of insanity we now continue to make the same negative mistakes, expecting a different and positive result.

The blind ignorance continues after the Ft. Hood jihadist massacre and the near-miss terrorist act of the “Underwear Bomber.”

“On November 5, 2009, the United States Army was viciously attacked from within by an ideologue bent on pursuing an agenda of Islamic Jihad. This ideologue fell under the separatist influence of political Islam, not while serving as an officer in the U.S. military, but from his birthright as a Muslim. It is incumbent upon our military to begin to understand this theo-political ideology that threatens our soldiers and our country internally and externally.” These critical lines are completely missing from the Pentagon’s 84-page report reviewing the massacre of 13 U.S. soldiers and contractors at Fort Hood. Yet this is only one of many omissions that the Pentagon should obviously pursue from this incident.

The result of the new military mind is that our entrenched mindset of victimization and political correctness is precluding a vitally necessary open discussion of faith-based issues both inside and outside of the military. The current military and governmental culture precluded Hasan’s superiors from questioning anything relating to his religious faith.

At a Jan. 15, 2010, press conference Secretary Robert Gates himself confirmed this state of affairs:

“Current policies on prohibited activities provide neither the authority nor the tools for commanders and supervisors to intervene when DOD personnel {are} at risk of personal radicalization.”

Yet the secretary has recommended Secretary of the Army John McHugh “take appropriate action” with regards to the report’s recommendations for “personnel responsible for supervising Major Hasan.” Those recommendations include career-ending reprimands for several of his superiors.

How can we hold these soldiers responsible for not preventing Hasan’s actions if we aren’t giving them the environment and the tools they need to confront Islamic terrorism within the military? The military cannot allow the mantra of victimization of Muslims to dominate how it handles force protection. Islamic terrorism is real and it cannot be confronted unless we are honest about the threat it represents. Hasan is not the first American military Islamic terrorist and he won’t be the last if we do not address the truth

Fort Hood gunman Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan wasn't the only terrorists working on a Texas Army base the day of the shooting who had links to Islamic terrorists. Louay Safi for example, a high-ranking official in ISNA, the Islamic Society of North America (a known terrorist organization) The article notes that, in spite of Safi’s questionable public statements and connections with terrorist Muslims, he has been retained by the military to teach our soldiers about Islam! It is about time that we learn something about our enemy after eight years into this war, but do you think it is a good idea to hire the enemy to teach us. (They lie you know)

In a February 5th article on our friend Steven Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) website, we read that Omar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the “Underwear Bomber,” spent two weeks in Houston attending a course conducted by the AlMaghrib Institute. According to the article, this was the third AlMaghrib course Abdulmutallab had taken. This article tells us a great deal about the kind of “education” Abdulmutallab was getting—right here in the United States—and sheds light on what motivated Abdulmutallab to decide to engage in jihad.

For instance, videotapes obtained by IPT show the Houston director of AlMaghrib glorifying jihad and honoring a man who was sentenced to life in prison for soliciting Jihadists to wage war against the United States.

The article begs the question, at what point, do Jihadists, who train others in violent militant jihad against the United States, lose their rights to free speech in our country?

Can’t we all just get along sing cum bi ya and have a group hug? No we can’t.

The deception
If you can remember, a while back a Muslim group called “Muslims Against Sharia” responded to one of my more - stab them in the eye articles, and tried to convince me that they, as moderate warm-fuzzy middle of the road Muslims, were going to reform Islam. (I published the entire dialog between us on this web site) I soon discovered what was meant by “Reform”. I challenged them when they said they had rewritten the Quran, leaving out the entire militant Jihadist “kill the Kaffaar stuff” and the law of Sharia. My Challenge was “By whose authority do you change and or eliminate your god Allah’s words”. Their response was as you might have guessed, indirect at best. They responded with “Well, the Christian religion reformed!” I could only guess that they were referring to the Protestant Reformation. I supposed that they thought I didn’t know anything about Islam or Christianity. My response back to them ended of our discussion about the so-called Muslim Reformation. I wrote back to them and said, “The Protestant Reformation changed people, not the word of God”.

The point hear is, unlike the Protestant Reformation of Catholicism, which was a reformation of the people, in other words, the people were corrupt not the religion. Islam on the other hand cannot change when the Quran still teaches them to kill the Kaffaar as well as oppress the world with Sharia law. As far as “Muslims Against Sharia” are concerned, Muslims have been trying to deceive Infidels for years with the “Islam is a peaceful religion” routine. Moreover, publishing a special Quran for the Kaffaar without all the negative parts only supports that deception.

In my book “The Deception” the opening paragraph points out that the religion of Islam is nothing but a deception, moreover, the most deceived people about Islam are Muslims. The next most deceived are all the rest of us Infidels deceived by the deceived people of Islam, truly an example of the blind leading the blind.

When our government allows the very people that we are at war with, to be members of our own military, then our government is deceived, (they just don’t get it). Just as during the Second World War, we were at war in Europe with a religious ideology called Nazism; we were not a war with the German people. Today we are at war in the Middle East, not with the Arab people but with a religious ideology called Islam. Just as we were at war with Nazis then, today we are at war with Muslims.

One is either a Muslim or one is not!
What our Judeao Christian Western society fails to understand is just as there are no warm-fuzzy moderate middle of the road Nazis, there are also no warm-fuzzy middle of the road moderate Muslims. If one identifies oneself with Nazis then one follows the philosophies of the ‘Third Riche’ and what is taught in Mine Kampf. Muslims identify themselves with Islam by following the teachings of Allah in the Quran and Muhammad in the Hadith.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Electing Muslims to high congressional positions in our government, hiring Muslims as teachers in our schools or to do sensitivity training for our security agencies, granting tax free status to so-called Muslim charities, (which are nothing but terrorist supporting organizations) are all part of the process of deceptive infiltration. Not for the purpose of assimilation, but for the purpose of oppression. Not for becoming one of us, but to change us, into one of them. (It’s in the Hadith; they are just following a book written by their prophet)

Today we haven’t yet identified whom we are at war with. Our Pentagon identifies the war as “The Overseas Contingency”. The Muslim Terrorists are called “Insurgents” Making up ignorant names for them isn’t going make them any less dangerous or make them go away.

As I said the opening paragraph in the War College manual says; “first, identify your enemy”.

We haven’t even taken the first step to winning this war… Moreover, it is now the longest and most expensive war in American history.

The war is not only in the Middle East, it is right here, smoldering in our schools, in our government and in our streets and neighborhoods. There are now more Muslim terrorists living in the State of Michigan than there are in the entire Country of Afghanistan.

Do you think we could be so infiltrated by our enemy the Nation of Islam --- that we no longer intend to win this war?

If so, you might want to vacuum your prayer rug…

de Andréa.

No comments: