scratch-mark

How Stupid American Foreign Policy Still Isn’t Responsible For Muslim Radicalization

7152632201_e8b1efff57_b

It’s the philosophy, stupid. And women.

Now, I know some are asking ‘what in the fuck is anarchist, State-hater Richard doing?’

Simple. I’m picking a side and setting aside a side, for now, because as I opined previously, Anarchism is a political philosophy for civilized people, inapplicable in large measure, now. In other words, we have an organized and determined anti-civilization that presently requires utterly obliteration and destruction—without mercy or pity; without reservation, or purposes of evasion—and then and only then can we have beers in the pub where we solve all the world’s problems again, go to a stripper bar after, and end up in a curry house at 2 a.m. Then we move on.

It’s the left that stands in the way of this, and that includes their libertarian allies, I’m sorry to say. They stand in opposition to doing anything truly effective, on so many levels it’s almost a situation where the anti-civilization problem is far more pronounced than just the radical Muslim primitivity might suggest. It’s a two-front war.

Let’s get down to brass tacks. The Muslim Brotherhood formed in 1928.

The Brotherhood’s stated goal is to instill the Qur’an and Sunnah as the “sole reference point for … ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community … and state.”[13] Its mottos include “Believers are but Brothers”, “Islam is the Solution”, and “Allah is our objective; the Qur’an is the Constitution; the Prophet is our leader; jihad is our way; death for the sake of Allah is our wish.“[14][15][16] It is financed by members, who are required to allocate a portion of their income to the movement,[17] and was for many years financed by Saudi Arabia, with whom it shared some enemies and some points of doctrine.[17][18]

A little bit before GWB’s time, wouldn’t you say? Even, shall we say, a bit before Middle Eastern oil became a geopolitical football? That was 1928, right around the time of the flapper era, the Great Depression, and the eve of the Golden Age of Hollywood. Coincidental timing, I’m sure. But girls just wanna have fun.

Even 25 years later, in the early 1950s, they were uncompromising in terms of the inexorable advance of such modernity that was “brazenly assaulting” the Muslim world, just like everywhere else.

Here, you can understand it in just 2 minutes and 12 seconds. This is a video of an Arab leader—president of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser—speaking to a crowd concerning his 1953 attempts to compromise with the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s damn remarkable to watch him mock them while the crowd cheers.

I’ve taken the effort of transcribing it

In the year 1953 we really wanted to compromise with the Muslim Brotherhood, if they were willing to be reasonable, and I met with the head of the Muslim Brotherhood, and he sat with me and made his requests.

What did he request?

The first thing he asked for was to make wearing a hijab mandatory in Egypt, and demanded that every woman walking in the street wear a tarha.”

[This is why you have to watch the video. His expressions and bodily movements are comedic and charismatic.]

…”Let him wear it.” [someone shouts from the gathered crowd; crowd roars, Nasser laughs]

And I told him if I make that a law they will say that we have returned to the days of Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, who forbade people from walking at day and only allowed walking at night [crowd laughter], and my opinion is that every person in his own house decides for himself the rules; and he replied, “No as the leader, you are responsible.”

I told him “Sir, you have a daughter in the School of Medicine and she’s not wearing a tarha.” [crowd laughs]

Why didn’t you make her wear a tarha? If you — [applause interrupts] — if you are unable to make one wear a tarha — if you are unable to make one girl—who is your daughter—wear the tarha, you want me to put a tarha on 10 million women … myself? [crowd erupts in laughter].

Contrast that scene with the mutherfucking “heart wrenching” BULLSHIT you get from the left and “libertarians,” now; and in particular particulars, the moron fucktarded left with their abject ignorance of all history except where they can try to score points in terms of stupid US Middle East policy—and anywhere else they can get their encephalitis on.

Let me give you some easy homework. Go to Google Images. Plug in: ‘women in kabul afghanistan‘. Take visual note of the very preponderance of your results. Now, place your cursor at the end of the results, hit your space bar, and append four numbers: ‘women in kabul afghanistan 1970‘.

Note the damn visual difference, get your fucking head out of your ass, and tell me how this is just “blowback,” and it’s America’s fault, which is the fucking stock answer now from both the left and the so-called libertarians.

Here’s a taste of juxtaposition, you leftist and libertarian fucktards.

America had nothing to do with any of this, whatsoever:

548x331_afghan_women_1970s_via_twitter

tumblr_m8bpv0gdbf1qd3ucoo1_1280

But this is completely the fault of America:


Until any of you can actually think, and form your own views based upon your own hint tidbits and rabbit-hole research, just go the fuck away—in wait for the next narrative created by someone else that, if enough people take on, you can feel safe in integrating and quacking.

Otherwise, create your own narrative on your own exclusive authority. See if you can sell it to others. Otherwise, this is you:

baby birds feeding

(H/T Billy Beck, for the hint tidbit with that Nasser vid.)

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More

24 Comments

  1. Dr. Weezil on November 19, 2015 at 12:30

    Bullshit. So you cite Afghanistan, but fail to note it was before the USSR starting poking its nose in there, how convenient. It still proves the point that interventionism is the cause. That’s what civilized, thinking, history-studying people are saying, not America, Richard.

    Interventionism by Great Britain, France, Italy, the USSR, and the United States into the affairs of countries where they had no business interfering in. Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, all highly secularized, liberal democracies in the early part of the 1900s, highly educated, tolerant societies, until interventionism by the west, displacing their governments, and playing into the hands of these buffoons you’re obsessed with. There was also the little thing about funding and arming these mutants, which is all well established.

    So what if the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the ’20s? They were nobodies until the West decided they were useful allies to displace local democracies that were becoming way too independent and powerful.

    “Derp, you fucktards, go read history.”

    We have, all of it, not just the cherry picked examples you’re clinging to.

    So what’s next on the poop front, since your dropped potato starch, and switched to iron? What’s the new, grand, all-encompassing solution to the obesity/disease epidemic, huh? Given your shoddy analysis of history, why should any of us agree with anything you have to say about anything else?

    • Richard Nikoley on November 19, 2015 at 12:37

      “So you cite Afghanistan”

      Read the post again, Weezil.

      Dismissed.



    • Richard Nikoley on November 19, 2015 at 12:45

      It is so very remarkable how some so have to cite extra-natural causes when the natural cause is staring them right in the face.

      To put it simply, [Impotent] Muslim men could not tolerate a society where women were not absolutely subjugate and that’s an enormous part of the entire story of the 20th century. When did women’s suffrage, that began in the 1880s really pick up steam? Just one of many for-instances.

      Of course, that only applies in the West where, analogous to this whole thing, white men are the cause of all problems.



  2. Rob on November 19, 2015 at 14:04

    It’s the intervention huh?

    So the reason that Al Qaeda was killing and plundering in Somalia, Sudan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Yemen etc. is because all those countries had a military empire meddling in the affairs of Islam? Get real. Or all those countries had a landing strip in the deserts of Saudi Arabia? Bullshit.

    People choose to be evil, then rationalize it after the fact. End of story.

  3. Steven on November 19, 2015 at 20:57

    My Arabic parents (dad born in 1928 mom in 1941) will agree with everything you say here.

    I have talked to them endlessly about this. Islam=Evil. No truer equation exists.

    • Richard Nikoley on November 20, 2015 at 07:52

      Yea, Steven. I have always suspected that tons older Muslims probably feel this way on varous levels.



    • Steven on November 20, 2015 at 09:45

      We have countless examples pre 20th century of the muzzies trying to sack the world.

      Yes some brilliant things came from the Ottoman empire but how many “Christian” locals suffered through that and how many great things were actually made by the muzzies in that time period vs what they claimed as theirs via plunder. I think it is more like Tesla vs Edison. Tesla created while Edison usurped ideas.

      And I seem to recall the Christian crusades were a response to what those muzzies were doing for centuries before.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIeG_0WfaJw

      Damn the libtards/progressives/sympathizers for being ideologically and factually way wrong.



  4. Eric on November 20, 2015 at 06:29

    After WWII the US set up secular, authoritarian regimes in the Middle East but somewhere between the Iran hostage deal and the Soviet Afghan war powerful interests associated with oil and defense industries began to realize that their interests would be better served by promoting radical Islam in the region. It would be hard to do that openly so instead mistakes are made that indirectly help to promote the radicals, like the whole Iraq war, and all the American hardware left behind for them with the fall of Mosul. Believing that these so-called “mistakes” are really just honest dumb mistakes is the real stupidity. There is an ongoing conspiracy to make the government look even more incompetent than it really is, this is just one of the many areas in which that concept comes into play.

    • Richard Nikoley on November 20, 2015 at 07:49

      Even if all that were acknowledged, of what importance is it beyond a lessons of history perspective?

      For instance, how would an acknoledgement that German, back-breaking reparation payments for WWI were primary motivation for their buildup and start of WWII been helpful to the task of defeating the NAZI at the time?



    • Eric on November 20, 2015 at 08:08

      In the interest of truth I believe it’s important to note that the indirect, secret, or open yet disguised as mistaken support for these radicals is on going, it’s not just historical. What you do with that information is up to you.



    • Richard Nikoley on November 20, 2015 at 08:16

      Fair enough, but wouldn’t you suppose that direct, devastating and overwhelming force against them would be one of the better, most efective means of outing these liasions, rendering them moot, or both?



    • GTR on November 20, 2015 at 12:01

      US has been involved with Muslims much longer than just starting after 2 world war.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

      “In March 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli’s envoy, ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). When they enquired “concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury”, the ambassador replied:
      It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy’s ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once.[22]”



    • Richard Nikoley on November 20, 2015 at 12:21

      Indeed, the idea that this is some new phenomena is for those who get their news on cable, never study history, never check facts, never do even a modicum of research witch is so easy now it really tells you how intellectually bankrupt most people are.

      They are mostly literally standing in wait for their favorite priest to just tell them what to think.



    • gabkad on November 20, 2015 at 17:53

      Agreed. What people don’t oftentimes realize is the entire ‘discovery’ of the Americas was driven by the closing off of trade routes by the Ottoman empire. They had ‘control’ over the output of the gold and silver mines in Transylvania as well.

      Quite possibly Islam has been the greatest formative power over the past 1000 years.



  5. Eric on November 20, 2015 at 08:16

    And I mean to say these “people” if you can even call them that do need to be dealt with and their military power taken away and radical Islam would probably enjoy much less influence than radical Christians in this country if they were no longer being covertly supported by Western/Saudi sources and there wasn’t such an obvious campaign to antagonize whole populations. The “fucktards” get it wrong by only focusing on the 2nd part. At least they’s not as stupid the total idiots who just go along with whatever they’re told by Fox News.

  6. Eric on November 20, 2015 at 08:18

    Yes bombing them all and letting God sort them out would settle the issue for the time being, but that’s not going to happen, this game requires drawing it out quite a bit longer than that. This guy gets it: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b6c_1447660445#EvICV7mIvXuOf3rI.01

    • Eric on November 21, 2015 at 05:27

      And for the record I don’t think indiscriminate bombing is a good thing or even much more than a short term solution. Unfortunately they don’t have a clubhouse where you can just catch them all together. The whole situation is easily engineered to be very difficult to resolve. The first thing to do is start cutting out their support but that’s not going to happen either. The Sunni population in this area hates America for many reasons including the “dumb” things that were done there but they don’t really like these maniacs much either, very few people really wants this kind of radical extremism, but the extremists can enforce it ’cause they got weapons from America and money from Saudi Arabia, plus oil now that they’re able to sell for real money too.



  7. Robert Ross on November 20, 2015 at 11:52

    I’ve read for a long time and you’re dissolving into nonsense in front of my eyes. I think the problem here is that you see geopolitics in terms of left vs right, and fail to see yankee actions as outcomes of institutional forces. Institutional analysis. How else can you fail to see the continuity of your nation-state’s policy through left and right administrations? It beggars belief truly. And you want to descend into the left is responsible for this and right for that when we’re talking about CENTURIES long developments? You’ve been bang on in the past but this is asinine. I’ve got some good info from you but this political stuff makes it not worth it. Good bye.

    • Richard Nikoley on November 20, 2015 at 12:07

      If you have been paying attention, Robert, I always go after the right.

      Typically and often, more than the left because both paradigms are all wrong, just in different ways, and some are better for some things sometimes.

      You watch. In this, the right will capitalize and given only two possible alternatives, they should, and I don’t even care that tons on the religious right see it as their god’s victory over a false god.

      See my comment on omniparadigmatic thinking, either in this comment thread or the last one.

      Until you do, and until you understand the way I both understand and stand over, it’s hopeless to get how I operate



  8. GTR on November 20, 2015 at 11:53

    Does anyone have a reliable estimate on how many deaths can be attributed to islam over it’s history?

    • Richard Nikoley on November 20, 2015 at 12:16

      GTR, shouldn’t it suffice that they are currently engaged in weekly beheadings and crucifixions of “apostates” in the Caliphate?



  9. solver on November 21, 2015 at 16:09

    Why not parachute a few hundred thousand American feminists into the middle east and get them to teach their middle eastern sisters to fuck those cunts up.

    Could be a Pareto optimal outcome, yeah?

  10. jon w on November 21, 2015 at 23:51

    There’s some truth in your rant but “this is completely the fault of America” is a straw man. There is a very strong argument that outsiders’ intervention in support of warlords and dictators has been a gold mine for religious nuts recruiting followers. To the extent America does this shit, it shares the blame for the conditions that exist. Unless you think that US meddling in world affairs has only had positive effects.

    And I get what youre doing but “America had nothing to do with any of this, whatsoever” is of course false as well. The miniskirts on those 1970 Kabul cuties were a Western invention, as were the cars they were allowed to drive and the universities they attended.

    • Richard Nikoley on November 22, 2015 at 07:02

      That’s the point, jon w. Both statements as absolutes are false. It’s the juxtaposition of two false statements.

      Get it?



Leave a Comment





YouTube1k
YouTube
Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
40
45
Follow by Email8k
RSS780