Al-Qaeda: The Islamic Threat
Have
you notice that AL-Qaeda as a group hasn't
been so active lately? Especially after the riots started occurring in
the middle Eastern countries, or more specifically after the U.N.
became involved in those same conflicts in these specific regions. Could
it be that these very leaders trained and armed by the U.S. and other
countries over the years could actually be the secret hub of AL-Qaeda
itself?
Moreover,
that we've been looking for over the last decade or so, of whom has
been hiding in plain sight in Mubarak and Gaddafi? I wonder. Was it
the people themselves that eventually exposed AL-Qaeda in the end and
not so much the governments of the world? I think so.
The
same leaders that adamantly proclaimed peace and vowed to fight, or
assist us against AL-Qaeda? Could this be the same AL-Qaeda that we
have sought to rid the world of over the years? Who has caused so much
loss of innocent life through cowardly tactical strikes against the
unsuspecting innocent?
Could We Be Fighting Al-Qaeda?
Could
our current conflicts finally be cutting the head off of the proverbial
snake in our recent U.N. strikes against these mentioned tyrannical
leaders above? It would seem to be the case when you gauge the over all
level of terrorism going on in the world currently as there's little to
none in the way of activity as far as I can tell.
Let
me ask you something; what would be the best place to hide if you were
heading up a group like Al-Qaeda? The answer to this question would be
that you would need to be close to the ones whom you wish to attack,
correct?
Such
as dinners on occasion at the White House, or other cordial events in
concerning other governments in the interest of diplomacy or to discuss
trade policies, perhaps? How much better would it be to not only remain
close to your targets, but to even be afforded the consideration of
their military protection and other forms of national aid on a annual
basis?
The Al-Qaeda Plot
An
enemy doesn't have to necessarily infatuate a government body
physically to actually use that government for it's own cause or gain
while attacking that same government from remote and unrelated
locations. What could be some other motives or incentives that would
drive a third world nation to take part in this sort of covert activity?
P lenty I would venture to say, as follows:
Of
course, if a nation is under attack from a unknown or unseen ghost of a
enemy, and a certain country walked up to offer it's assistance or aid
by simply saying "We know the terrain", and "We know this particular
enemy" "so why not let us track them down for you?" Moreover, this comes
at a price in that you must protect us from the retaliation of this
enemy by protecting and arming us.
So,
you have an enemy that is not only benefiting from the protection of a
super power, benefiting from the annual arms allotment
or budget whom further has international preferrential favoritism or
moreover a preferred type of treatment being given this certain nation
and or an enemy that has
the latest intelligences information and warnings about itself coming
down through the Pentegon channels.
Brothers Of Radical Islam
Moammar
Gaddafi, Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein were all educated in the Unites
States; they were again placed into power, armed and funded by previous
U.S. administrations before the Obama Administration came along. Why?
In a effort to stabilize the Middle Eastern regions and to further
forward or enhance any U.S. interest in a volatile part of the world.
These
were men that the U.S. backed and supported in years past via the
Reagan and Bush Administrations mainly and others concerning various
policies that pertains to the middle eastern countries and so forth.
We've given these men certain considerations in our trade and protection
decision making process and furthermore gave them presidents over other
Arab nations via their wishes simply because they were of more
political value, or otherwise considered a more prevalent military asset
in our fight against terrorism.
Over
time, Mubarak was somewhat handleable, or the least the lesser trouble
out of all of them in my opinion however Saddam Hussein and Moammar
Gaddafi seemed to have turned into uncontrollable tyrannical dictators
living under a false democracy system, the "bad boys" of the Middle
East, so to speak.
Not
only do these persons live under a fictitious system of democracy, but
all the while adversely subjecting their people to human rights
atrocities. Currently we have a limited part in protecting the folks
over in Libya against the former leader Moammar Gaddafi, but if I had to
make a educated guess, it could be said that once this tyrant goes down
so will AL-Qaeda.
Why?
Because I think that this group of men are the hidden head of AL-Qaeda
itself. I believe that other members in AL-Qaeda such as Bin Laden and
others equal to his status are basically subordinates to these
mentioned former leaders, or are mercenary groups working in behalf of
them and nothing more.
Dealing With The Devil
Unfortunately,
individuals such as Moammar Gaddafi, Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and
Mubarak amongst others are very familiar with the U.S. government's
strengths and weaknesses and moreover, very capable on playing on them
with precision and accuracy and thus, the web we have had as nations
through our back room deals and uneven foreign policies with unstable
regimes can sometimes blow up in our faces.
Then
of course, these certain unstable factions are privy to certain
sensitive information regarding activities occurring between their on
country and the way the U.S. and other countries have dealt with them in
the past.
As
a result, these tyrants under serious serious U.N. opposition could
divulge sensitive information and this is why so many governments are
slow to defrock a given puppet, or tyrant for the sake of avoiding
political embarrassment. Everyone has sins that are moreover easily
forgiven by the world when attempting to turn it around by doing the
right thing.
I
would speculate that these relationships are more or less deals made
with the Devil for peace and resource via previous administrations, or
the lessor of two evils taken when attempting to safeguard a nation's
assets or interests such as much needed oil reserves and or other highly
sought after commodities.
In
the final analogy I would surmise that if these tyrannical leaders
living under the numerous false democracy systems were to be removed,
then the problem of terrorism would also be a thing of the past as well
contrary to what some believe.
Dirty Hands Cause Rebellions
I
seriously believe, that this inter mixing of political grandstanding,
back door or under the table deals and covert operations for gain with
these two bit tyrants would have continued to march on through the
years, as it has done in years past.
I
further believe that if attention weren’t called to this matter by the
very people that it served the least being the people in Indonesia,
Egypt and Libya, and if they hadn't rebelled, it would have continued on
way into the future despite all the good intentions and the will to
change outdates foreign policies.
In
short, business as usual is no longer "business as usual" because the
people of the progressive nations refuse to live under advert oppression
and poverty any longer. It's ironic in the way that it has come full
circle now in that these volatile regions will
ultimately force peaceful resolution and a better way of life through
rebellion, or raging against the evil that condemns and or oppresses
them.
Coming Around Full Circle
It's
also ironic in that these same freedom fighters be they doctors, lawyers
or just young boys just learning how to fight in a combat circumstance,
have risen up in the face of great adversity to sacrifice life and limb
that will eventually change the way the world views concerning the
actions of government, or the ways government actually conducts its
business in the name of the people.
Actually,
all the demons of a past administrations will always surface in time,
always. It is all foreseeably obvious as the light of day. Really all
one
has to do is to review history to discern not only the truth but the
outcome of any political or social situation.
Please don't get me wrong here when I use the U.S. as a model or example as this isn't
a attempt to single out any particular nation especially my own however,
some things are a matter of record that makes for a good and clear example.
I
feel that our past administrations have been involved in these activities
along with other notable governmental systems and not so much our current
Administrations. You know guys, this way of operating has been going on
for a long time. In fact, all the way back to the Celtic, Roman, Greek,
Islamic and Jewish kingdoms etc.
The New Rome In Peril
An example, Rome wasn't
taken over from external forces but rather imploded from bad dissension
within its ranks, economic problems, over spending, wrongful
displacement of wealth, back door deals, wars for gain, bad foreign and
domestic policies, and over taxation of the people to support its over
zealous military exploits.
Yes, what we observe occuring in the Far East isn't
anything new. In fact it's been going for as long as man has existed
upon the earth, and interestingly enough, it plays out the same way over
and over again. It's almost like were doomed to repeat our past over and
over again simply because we cannot or choose not to remember it.
All
one has to do today is look at the circumstances of ancient Rome in
peril, and compare these same conditions to not only the U.S., but
other super power nations as well. If you do this with all honesty, you
will see that these same issues suffered by Rome are now imminent
problems that lay in waiting for the horizon that will eventually lead to our
destruction in the end if not corrected.
The Beginning Of The End
When
we see countries like Libya, Egypt, and Indonesia rising up against their
leaders as every other ancient society has done from time to time, we
know there are deep underlying problems in society as a whole, especially
when the people are past the breaking point of what is socially
acceptable, tolerable, or more then what that particular society can bear. This
could be the beginning of the end.
Kingdoms,
Dynasties or Governments all have one thing in common; they rise, and
they eventually fall; however, what determines the length of their stay is
found in the way they treat their people and how they govern themselves internally.
In
short, does the leader have his eyes toward the future and what is
ultimately good for the people and government? Or is that leader primarily
interested in accumulating wealth and power for himself and those close
to him with little to no regard to other vital matters of state.
Longevity
rests in both a nation's foreign and domestic policies, and not living
beyond their means. Furthermore, it always helps to maintain a good working
relationship between government and people through fairness, transparency
and consistency.
Again, in other words, don't
cause political, or economical hardship on the people, lest it come back
to haunt you in a very memorable way such as can be seen in the
rebellions or uprisings currently going on all over the world.
Again,
concerning the current U.S. Administration, I don't
believe that this administration takes part in these
unethical activities however I believe this was common place in
past administrations that has spilled over into something that the Obama
Administration now has to deal with in a prudent way, just for the
record.
The Rules Of Engagement
There
has been a lot of controversy over the no fly zone recently, or so is
my opinion on this issue as I see it. The outline of the U.N.
mandate should be followed to the letter as it is these nations that
pass and enforce this particular international law, as we all know.
In
short, when all hostile aircraft have been removed from a designated air
space then by all reasonable definitions of that decree, "the no fly
zone" order has been executed. If the United Nations mandate was given
extensions or language was afforded the mandate to extend the rules of
engagement to hostile ground forces, then this should be executed to the
letter as well.
It's
all about the description and language of the U.N. mandate and acting out
on it to the letter without deviation or alteration. We have to remember
that this action was solely implemented and enforced to protect innocent
civilians from any air assaults, no more and no less.
Intervention
via the United States, or any other nation outside of the U.N. mandate
would be a unlawful action against a nation or Libya, or other sovereign
government, in my opinion.
Chopping Off The Snake's Head
Concerning
the removal of the leader in question, of course this is a entirely
different matter that would take another action such as a international
order to extract such individual under U.N. warrant for war crimes, or
crimes against humanity.
If this were the case, then said individual would have to be picked up by a U.N.
extraction team to stand trial for a particular charge, or set of
charges. Actually, if you cut off the head of the snake then the rest of
the snake dies, so this would be a more effective approach verses
protracted military operation. It would also be prudent to act out on
such a warrant before the former leader could "dig in" such as is what's
going on currently, in my opinion.
Currently, the way the "no fly zone" reads, ( and from my understanding,) the U.N.
and allied forces have successfully executed this order, or could be
about to fully execute this order. If this is the case, then the U.S. and
its allied forces must honor the decree of the Untied Nations to the
letter unless extensions have been cited and are clearly outlined for
protracted engagement.
Concerning
the arming the rebels, this should be the option of other allied forces
should they so choose to do so; however it is my opinion in that the
United States should maintain both limited and temporary involvement in
this conflict, or any other instance of conflictual engagement in other
parts of the world. I would say that the U.S. has a "working recipe"
currently and moreover should continue to pursue the goal of
disengagement at the first opportunity available.
Regarding Japan
I
understand that any government wishing to avoid mass public hysteria is
well within its rights when attempting to save the many over the few yet
to conceal information, or to withhold information of a lethal nature
and consequence is to create more overall harm to the public.
If
a nation were to have such deadly events taking place, or knowing that
such deadly events might take place within a certain region in time such
as mass flooding, or mass doses of radiation particles being emitted directly
into the environment over prolonged spans of time, then evacuation of
potential victims or survivors should be initiated immediately.
I
think that when you have three out of five reactors blow off their tops,
smoking or over heating while releasing clouds of white steam and packed
with radiation, I think it's safe to assume that a goodly amount of
radiation has escaped out into the environment; enough so that it will
case death to a good many within a 50 to100 mile radius of such a
accident zone.
I
would think that such a government body would be transparent with their
people about such dire issues, yet this government doesn't seem to be
forthcoming with the actual readings, or level count of radiation
infection. When you have U.S.
ships backing off fifty to a hundred miles, or evacuating troops from
the coast, then this says something about the fall out level in the
area.
The
whole Japaneses crisis is unfortunate indeed however secretly or
withholding vital information from the Japaneses people makes this crisis
even worse. I admire the people and government of Japan however the
government seems to be working overtime in downplaying the situation to
the detriment of their people.
I
am left wondering why the Japanese government is suppressing this
important information in this way? Furthermore, why they aren’t
implementing evacuation operations to save the survivors from immediate
radiation poisoning that will in turn cause immediate death or long term
health problems?
Written By James R. Morgan ll
~And~
Janhett Tayler Windglows