'MCA go home' vs 'Where was DAP 13 years ago?' at Jonker Walk
What?! Gan qualified his being there as a survey, not to protest? Let alone to lead the protest? Did Mr. Gan Tian Loo realize that the MCA protest carries more weight than DAP protest many times
over. The state government, being UMNO-led government, considers the DAP as the opposition working hand-in-hand with PAS and PKR to oust UMNO from power, rescinding the directive on the request
from DAP leaders will make the party even more popular. I thought, at first, here come the MCA, finally to do what it's supposed to do. Then the expected happened. He got cold feet. The
reporter who covered the protest reported Gan was suddenly cautious . He was like ..."I'm here to lend my support to..the .. no, wait! I am not here to support the traders - but just to do a quick
survey! But I am glad to be standing here with the protesters but reporters, please put it down in black and white I am not, I repeat, am not here as part of the protest. This is the reason the MCA
was shunned, I mean has been shunned by the Chinese. They do not represent the Chinese anymore. They cannot get things done anymore unlike in the old days. Gan admitted his meeting with the chief
minister was fruitless, but would keep trying. Keep trying for what? He should stop embarrassing the MCA and reducing its credibility further by continuing to beg despite being rebuffed earlier.
Again, this proved that the Malaysian Chinese Association has really completely lost its usefulness. If a small matter like Jonker Walk closure was beyond its power then, that 's it.
Judge Roy Moore Like Candidate Trump Fell Victim To Women
THE DRL BLOG
Links You May Like
Ananda Khrishnan Earned Bumiputra Status For For
Indians In Malaysia>More?
when I received a call the other day (night) from a Miss Lee complaining about her fridge not working (she noticed the temperature inside the fridge was warm comparable to room temperature), I asked her to check if the fridge's power switch was at on or off?
Links You May Like
Why Tun Dr Mahathir Was So Powerful When He was Prime Minister?>More Here
How To Stop Drinking Without Stopping!>Read More Here
Opportunist Writers From Indian Community> Read More
Judge Roy Moore Like Candidate Trump Fell Victim To Women>More here
Israel Can Stop Palestinians' Roket Firings From Gaza (Once And For All) >More
Contaminated Blood Coursing Through Muslim Veins A No-No>More
Clinton Or Trump>More
How You Intend To Vote in November?>More
Obama Took The Crown>More Here
Hannah Yeoh Won't Apologize For Wearing Headscarf>More..
Abdullah Rebuffed Them>More
Lim's Horrendous Success>More Here
Lim Guan Eng A Phenomenon>More
Even The Once Mighty British Seem To Have Thrown In The Towel>Read More
Clash Of Titans> More Here
Not Easy Being DAP>Read More
Pak Lah Was Too Kind To Do What Was Expected Of Him>More Here
President Trump: James Comey, You Are Fired>More
Not Easy Being MCA Leaders>More
A Commander-in-chief Who Doesn't Act Like One>More..
Nobel Prize Winners>More..
Trump Had Better Keep His Promise>More
Warning For The Rich And Powerful>Read More
Ananda Khrishnan Earned Bumiputra Status For For
Indians In Malaysia>More?
MCA Must Demand Return Of All Its Traditional
Seats>Read More
A British Adventurer Who Became King By His Own
Hand>Read More
Where's The MAS Flight MH370 Now>More..
The Greatest Medicine
Man Ever Lived>Read More
Can President Trump Single-handedly Take On His
Enemies And Win>More here
Israel Can Stop Rocket Firings From Gaza (Once And For All)
>Read More...
The Greatest Medicine Man Ever Lived>Read More
Can President Trump Single-handedly Take On His Enemies And Win>More here
Israel Can Stop Rocket Firings From Gaza (Once And For All) >Read More...
By David Lang
The following stories may fire your imagination, pique your interest. Some say 1MDB is Malaysia's Sovereign Wealth fund; to others they asked what wealth fund when its total capitalization is just One million ringgit? But, then again, if you think you can look down on the pet idea of the Malaysian prime minister, think again. His idea has the potential of turning the now world famous - or shall we say, infamous - 1Malaysia Development Berhad into a giant corporation you can ever imagine - even bigger than Bill Gate's Microsoft! At least, it could be, if the original course is stayed. It was supposed to inspire Malaysians to think big besides advance growth, according to its slogans screaming out of giant bill boards throughout the country. 'Backed' by the finance ministry who owns it - which means money will never be the problem - it can only succeed. But..it didn't. It failed! That's why it may have piqued many people's curiosity. How can a company flush with cash and can borrow any amount (billions) anytime could fail? Well, this may be in line with your thinking. People have seen since its inception - I mean after its name was changed in 1999 from Trengganu Investment Authority (TIA) to the present - it hasn't done any business! I have used present tense deliberately. It hasn't done any business yet. I mean if you are in business you need to make profit or find ways to make profit. Or close shop. Oh, I had heard about their filings of tax returns and hiring of a couple of internationally known auditors to sign off on their balance sheets; but these concerned only the company's borrowings and interests to be paid. Two massive bonds were issued to the tune of $7 billions. To buy up power plants. Again I want to say if you are in business to make money even investing in independent Power Plants, it should be done with the view to making a profit. The decision may be long term or short term, it doesn't matter, it has to make money, or no deal. May be they have done the right thing. Maybe luck was not on their side. Still, the amount is staggering. I didn't know having or managing so much money can be a problem! But many - especially the Malays - have not given up hope yet. Yes, may be the durians are just ripening; may be they need time and may fall soon!
This is a automatic time
Malaysia's Woes
If You Wish To Settle Down In Great Britain You Are Welcome But Please Apply For Visa First
Chinese The Real Kingmaker In Malaysian Politics
Why 1MDB Sovereign Wealth Fund Failed?
Local politics
Opportunit Writers From Indian Community
If You Wish To Settle Down In Great Britain You Are Welcome But Please Apply For Visa First
Alcohol Effect: (PAS' Muslim Now Concerned About Non- Muslims' Health?
Hannah Yeoh Won't Apologize For Wearing Headscarf
A Commander-in-chief Who Doesn't Act Like One
Israel Has No Choice But To Deter
Contaminated Blood Coursing Through Muslim Veins
Can President Trump Single-handedly Take On His Enemies And Win
Chinese The Real Kingmaker In Malaysian Politics
Trump Had Better Keep His Promise
President Trump: James Comey, You Are Fired
About Dr Mahathir
Why Tun Dr Mahathir Was So Powerful When He Was Prime Minister?
If You Wish To Settle Down In Great Britain You Are Welcome But Please Apply For Visa First
Recent Articles
This video is presented courtesy of Sally Page:
Malaysia's Vision 2020
By:David Lang
Malaysia is supposed to be on its way to becoming a developed nation, by the year 2020. Will she make it (in less than five years -tick-tuck, tick-tuck)? There is no doubt the year 2020 is coming whether the country is ready or not, and if that will be the only requirement then Malaysia will attain that developed nation status on schedule. There is a question, though, Will Malaysia, or Malaysians, for that matter, be ready for that status as far as their affluence, quality of life's concern? Currently Malaysia's GNI per capita stood at US$10060. According to the World Bank high income economies are those with GNI per capita of US$12,745. And until Malaysians earn much more to be there, the developed nation status may not be achieved even by the year 2020. The futility of declaring a country a high income country when it's not, achieves nothing. May be even counter-productive; it lulls the country into false sense of success and premature celebration. Don't forget China reportedly overtook Japan as the world's second largest economy, but in actual fact China's citizens' ca pita income is a fraction of the incomes of the Japanese who earn $37,000. Chinese incomes range from $13,000. China's gross domestic product, taken as a whole, may beat Japan's, but in term of quality of life, and GNI per capita income, the criteria for a developed nation status, China still has a lot of catching up to do. That's why China still qualifies as recipient of Japan's economic aid meant for developing countries. Comparing with the Chinese per capita domestic product, Malaysia is even worse off. Unless the government bucks up and rushes to create more wealth for its citizens, the Vision 2020 dream may remain just that ..a dream.
Jun 29, 2013
Jun 22, 2013
Apr 20, 2013
Apr 6, 2013
Apr 1, 2013
Feb 15, 2013
How To Repair Your Own Refrigerator And Save A Bundle
when I received a call the other day (night) from a Miss Lee complaining about her fridge not working (she noticed the temperature inside the fridge was warm comparable to room temperature), I asked her to check if the fridge's power switch was at on or off?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Apr 7, 2018
Content From syriainturmoil.newsvine.com
Ask Mark Zuckerberg why he chose Priscilla Chan to be his legally married
wife, I am sure he'd say he chose his wife not because of her big breasts or
fantastic ass; but because he found her attractive.
This, however, in no way implies that Caucasian, Hispanic, African or other
Asian women make horrible wives. They don't.
If some women find my two cents objectionable, I am sorry.
I am not claiming my two-cent is the only one that's right. It's just that
that's the way it looks so far.
I want to hear from you all. Are you like Murdoch or Zuckerberg, married to
Chinese women? Yours truly by the way, also is. Couldn't be happier.[PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/05/20/11775547-zuckerberg-had-
just-updated-his-status-to-married]
What You Should Know About Islam?
Islam, mind you, is like a "One-way Street or "No-through Road."
If you are not blind or illiterate, you you know that these street and road
lead to nowhere, but people won't listen!
They, for instance, have to convert to Islam if they want to tie the knots
with their Muslim girlfriends, and yet go ahead.
Islam however is not at fault here. There are ample signs - like road signs -
which lead to dead end; conversion to Islam is permanent.
I mean once a Muslim always a Muslim whether you like or not. Anyone can enter
anytime but they are forbidden to leave. Oh, they will say, anyone can leave
if a sharia court judge allows it. It can happen, though, I concede that. But
don't count on it as your comfort is my only advice.
All followers of Islam are obligated to convert people of other religions to
Islam. It's unthinkable for a sharia judge to sanction you to leave
Islam.
Islam is a great religion if you believe in it and want it and can live with
it. Just..don't use Islam as a passport to your girlfriends' hearts; to keep
your promises to your girlfriends after they consent to have sex with you.
Prevention is better than cure here; don't have sex with a Muslim woman if you
only want sex but she want you to marry her. You will end up regretting until
you die. There is no way out. Even if after you're dead, you're not free. Once
you're confirmed dead, the religious authorities will take charge of your
remains to be done Islamic rites and buried in Muslim cemeteries.
Sympathies expected but none extended as far as Muslims are concerned.
Let's discuss how the American Muslims co-exist with fellow Americans.
If there is a controversy or event involving Muslims and they feel they are
being targeted or perceived to be targeted, they will cry wolf! wolf! wolf!
Yes, they will do that, and boy! how efficiently they respond. All Muslims of
every shapes and colors will down tools and come out in unison to condemn:
"Islam phobia; hate mongering, bigotry; minority religion under threats; we
demand our rights as Americans; we want to expose these people and who are
their financiers; we hel/div>
Their trade-mark minority-religion under attack remarks have become cliched
but will find traction with some Americans (A supposedly white American
reportedly had this to say: 'We have Muslim friends, who even used our church
to pray 5 times per day while their Mosque is being built or repaired; and
they had been our best friends, and will remain our best friends!") Well said,
friend; couldn't be better for your Muslim friends, the ones you had in mind
and those at large. They certainly need all the support they can get,
especially at this moment when they believe "They are under attack."
Ya, there are many white Americans who are easily misled, misguided, naive,
and have their heads buried in the sands.
These so-called, out-of-the-norm, do-good Americans (I prefer to call them
liberals) think they are clever and have goodwill to spare and dispense? Or
just to fish in troubled water? Some people do things mindlessly. Some are in
it cunningly for self-interests. Or selfish interests? They ignore their inner
minds telling them.." your actions will jeopardize your children and grand
children and America's future generations."
Americans are blind if they don't already see the damage already done to
American society through this mission creep perpetrated by Muslim Brotherhood
through their tireless front line soldiers of American Muslim Associations,
and not outright Muslim associations such as AAI, Southern Poverty Law Center,
to name a few. who give their all to help the MB realize their dream of
converting America.
They are not there yet, but on their way; but their mission creep is creeping.
In order to get the resolution to set up the no-fly zone in then Libya, the
western powers first used lies (it was about protecting civilians, remember?)
to pull wool over people's eyes and then...came mission creep. NATO literally
bombed that tiny country back to the stone age. The same scenario is being
repeated in America right now.
Are Americans afraid? We should be. I shudder to even imagine what it will be
like if the Muslim Brotherhood succeeds.
To understand what we are going to be plagued with in the future unless we act
fast, I invite you all to go back in time to the time when the Muslim
Brotherhood was down but not out in Egypt, 2008 to be exact.
After the Arab spring came followed by the Cairo square revolution, everything
changed. Mubarak was toppled and his nemesis emerged triumphant. They never
looked back since. Now only the Egyptian army stands in their way towards
complete control of this center of Arab civilization of 2000 years. They
already gained control of the Egyptian parliament and you know what that
means? It means they replace their nemesis, former president, Hosni Mubarak.
Almost; yes, they are on their way and already they had made clear to the
dreading Israelis across the Sinai desert, that Jews will be in for a tough
time.
But the Israelis are not alone who are dismayed by the turn of events: the 80
millions Egyptians now have found themselves yearning for the good old days
under Mubarak's tyrannous secular government.
It's obvious they can't trust the MB who promised to not run for president, at
first, but later went back on their words, just like that. Whether the Muslim
Brotherhood gets to rule Egypt under sharia law or not depends on the Egyptian
people who (alone) can decide.
If the Egyptian voters - especially women voters - are naive, they only have
themselves to blame (if the MB comes to power and carries out their threats to
impose sharia laws and cancel the peace treaty with Israel).
Similarly; if the MB triumphs in America and subjects us to sharia, it's our
own faults, collectively. It's we the majority who allow a tiny few like the
Southern Poverty Law Center, the AAI, and others, whites - who decried Pam
Geller's Stop Islamisation of America drive; and so they rushed to come up
with their own meeting called Stop Islamophobia in a town hall to discredit
Pam Geller's meeting in the memory of Jessica Moktad who was repeatedly raped
and, when according to police she threatened to reveal all, killed - to act
with carte blanche and embolden the MB and their followers. We allow SPLC to
label the Stop Islamisation of America headed by Pam Geller and Robert Spenser
hate group, just like that.
It's unknown what gave them the power to label others at will like that, and
why?
If we allow people with vested interests to act with carte blanche purportedly
on our behalf (Like Congressman Keith Ellison who shamelessly cried during
Congressman Peter King's meeting to discuss the creeping Islamization of
America, to which he was invited and during which he didn't mince his words in
condemnation of Congressman King, we are just asking for troubles. Troubles
will follow us every where until we stop them.
His shedding of crocodile tears during that meeting however gave birth to
derision for him on the internet for moths and became virulent.
Then, somehow, he was like hiatus. Perhaps there were too many questions for
him to answer why since he's so love being a Muslim or defending Islam, why he
chose to masquerade as a Christian by using Christian name Keith Maurice
Ellison. If he's in a Muslim country in Asia he will be in deep trouble; he
wouldn't last a year if he does or uses things even remotely associated with
Christianity, let alone sporting a Christian name. The religious authorities
will send him for religious counseling until cleansed. That's if Muslim
vigilantes didn't get to him first)./div>
The Muslims themselves not only remained silent or refused to condemn the
crime perpetrated against the poor 20 year old deceased in the prime of life,
but chose to go after those who they perceived to be a threat to their way of
life: honor killing.
Even the deceased's own mother showed so little concern for her flesh and
blood what to expect. Pam Geller claimed she was being harassed by the
murdered girl's mother. No, it isn't true! I don't believe it. Jessica's own
mother only wants injustice for her own offspring? I can't believe it. If it's
true, don't expect much from this mother. In fact, she should be deported to
her country of origin, if she's not local born. For a mother who turned away
from protecting her own daughter doesn't deserve to live in America. So too
those Americans, mostly white Americans, unfortunately, who saw fit to fight
against Pam Geller for trying to highlight a horrible practice in Muslim
society: honor killing; so horrible and all the more horrible, when it's used
to hide a crime.
Americans black or white, or Hispanics, the majority, must must not remain
silent, speak out now. Don't allow the minority to ride roughshod over you and
your future generations.
For starter, Americans should put these naive American few who label
themselves as Southern Poverty Law Center and AAI in their place, telling them
they have no place in America, and uphold Pam Geller and Robert Spenser.
Turn up in large number will send a clear enough message in case you don't
like to disparage other people, Muslims or not. Just turn up at the venue
where Pam Geller and Robert Spenser say they are going to hold their
meeting.
Never be intimidated by Pam's opponents' statements or uncompromising stands;
they are just like the rest of us, human beings. If we have fears they also
have fears.
We should not compromise with our children and grand children's choices.
We should respect our fellow Muslim Americans and their choices as we expect
them to respect us, and by extension, our children and grand children's
choices.
As for Jim Zogby (Is he a Jew; his name sounds like he's?) and the likes of
him, don't use violence against him but please be nice and say: "Mr. Jim
Zogby, we respect you as a fellow American highly but we have to tell you to
stop attacking Pam Geller and Robert Spenser. This country is big enough for
all the Pam Gellers and Robert Spensers and Jim Zogbys, or your friends the
Muslims. JUST DON'T try to disrupt others' plans and activities. Please. Thank
you so much!"[PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/04/30/11467469-what-you-
should-know-about-islam]
Syria A Chink in Iranian Armor
So, it had been decided. All of a sudden, somehow someone had decided time's
up for president Bashar al-Assad. He has to step down. Gives way. Cedes power.
Delegates power to his deputy. Whatever. It means the same thing: regime
change. They want his job.
It does not matter whether the president of Syria is guilty of the crime he's
been accused of; or that he had to act to protect his people, Syrian
sovereignty, or in self defense, he had been judged as guilty;
prejudged.
Nobody cared that he had been in power for more a decade without much problem
until the Arab Spring started. Even if it was true Assad did crack down on
dissent, it was to be expected. What leader would stand for such a challenge
to his authority. You can try the it any where the reaction will be the same.
Even in America itself. I don't think President Obama would find it amusing to
have a large crowd rallying in front of the White House with banners calling
for his downfall.I will be surprised if he hesitates to call in the FBI or CIA
to spirit away every person to prison, or worse to join with Private Bradley
Manning in his solitary confinement.
What President Assad has done can happen anywhere. Bangkok! Not long ago,
during the anti=government demonstrations by the red shirt groups who
supported Thailand's former prime minister Thaksin Shinawat, who was toppled
in a coup by the powerful military who then paved the way for Abhisit
Vejjajiva to succeed him. The majority of Thais saw red and launched their
protests. Prime minister Abhisit then ordered the army to put down the
rebellion with heavy loss of life and hundred injured (the protestors were
unarmed men, women and children and were killed in cold blood). Did the
hardworking UN intervene? No! Nobody, none, in the US or England or France,
said a word. Their hiatuses were unbelievable and absolutely unacceptable.
They should treat all human lives the same. I wonder why these people can
become so pissed off with Assad but not with Abhisit?
And what about President Robert Mugabe of Uganda who brutally seized the
Whites' farmlands, and ignored the human rights of his political rivals and
Zimbabwe's people in general. (Mugabe was also charged by the world court for
crime against humanity but surprisingly was left to his own devices, pretty
much, until today.
To his credit though, Robert Mugabe at later date relented and allowed Morgan
Tsvangiraj to be his prime minister in the unity government. But still his
power remains absolute, undiminished.
Next, the Burmese generals. These generals were so powerful that people or the
world treated them as if they had nuclear weapons. Only the United States
'dared' to stand up to Myanmar. Though gingerly. These generals were so
cocksure of themselves that they thought of themselves as gods. They trampled
on the Burmese people as if they were made of clay not flesh, blood and
brains. Even monks were not spared. And what about the catastrophes in Darfur,
Sudan, where ethnic cleansing was brutally carried by its president, Omar al-
Bashir? Well... so far nothing has happened to him, although the World Court
had laid charges against him. Was there a compromise, a deal struck? A quid
pro quo? Forgiven not forgotten, or forgotten not forgiven? Or both? Which
equals: case closed. Due to...lack of evidence, lack of support from the Arab
League, African Union, opposed by India, China, Russia. Or lack of will? May
be lack of appetite. Not very doable...could be messy. Didn't care. But.
But..wait a minute. President Omar al-Bashir was coaxed into agreeing to allow
the South's people to freely choose whether to remain with Sudan or break away
and become an independent state. They chose the latter. Fine. But what about
the murders he or his agents had committed for which he was charged. Perhaps
President Omar wouldn't agree to the referendum unless the charges against him
were unconditionally dropped?
So if President Assad can hang in there for while, while his army goes all out
to stamp out the opposition once and for all, like his father, he could expect
to be reprieved in a similar deal? He could give Idlib province (which is
already infested with unfriendly Turks anyway) independence like Omar al-
Bashir gave to South Sudan.
There is no difference between Sudan's Omar al-Bashir and Bashar al-Assad of
Syria, for crying out loud; except the former killed ten times more of his
people. Omar al-Bashir was given a way out because not only the West lacked
appetite for a possible remake of the scenario as depicted in the movie 'Black
Hawk Down' in which US soldiers were killed and their bodies dragged round by
pickup trucks in the dusty streets of Somali which led to President Bill
Clinton to decide the US was done with Africa, but also because the ends might
not justify the means.
While Sudan may have oil, like Syria, which was tempting to energy-hungry
West, it was not enough. Syria on the other hand was the key to Iran's far
flung influence in the Arab world. Without Syria - or shall we say Assad, Iran
will be isolated, encircled by the Arab countries backed by the US, and will
be eventually hemmed in.
That's the calculation everyone is focusing on. The West had recently lost
Lebanon to Iran, or Syria, or Hezbollah, it makes no difference, which, and
they were angry. They calculated if they could do a 'libya' to Syria, they
could undermine Iran's power as well as its influence in the Middle East,
which had spread to Iraq (another loss experienced by Washington), and even
Afghanistan.
Even the small kingdoms of Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar, to name a few, ruled by
the minority Sunnis over Shiia majority, are not safe from Iran, even with the
American Fifth Fleet stationed there. So they had to do something. In Libya,
they dragged their feet. But in Syria, they were in forefront calling among
the loudest for President Bashar to step down. No surprises there.
Unlike in their kingdoms, it's said, the majority of Syrians are Sunnis. Many,
in the West, put Assad's Alawite tribe as about ten percent. Was that right? I
don't know. But if that's correct, then President Bashar al-Assad must have
ruled Syria well (without the oppression or brutality he was labelled with) to
win over more than 60% of Sunni Syrians to support him. Granted, some Sunni
Syrians may choose to support Assad due to fears. But if he has had only
fifteen percent support (Alawite 10% plus Christians and Kurds another 5%), no
matter how strong or brutal his army was, Assad could never be where he's
today. Even his army is consisted of Syrians from all ethnic groups. Women
were free in secular Syria, as were their sisters in secular Egypt and Libya
of recent past. The Christians, the women, and Kurds, in their right minds,
would never dump Assad. To them, he's a known devil. He allowed everyone the
freedom to do his own thing... practice his own faith except..except one
taboo: to replace him. Or his son, later. This he will never agree. Nor will
his son, if he's one to succeed him.
But it seemed that's exactly what's happening. Oh,the Muslim Brotherhood had
tried that; and they had been defeated. No problems. The MB, as they are also
referred to, had also been active in the Mubarak-era Egypt, and there were no
problems, too. Except; the words 'defeated' in the past had been transformed
in, replaced by, oppressed or suppressed. Now the western media as well as the
Qatar-based Al Jazeera, are peddling the snake oil to the world that Syrian
president oppressed his own people, killing them mercilessly. Saying therefore
he has lost the legitimacy to rule. Even the western governments preferred to
avoid mentioning the Muslim Brotherhood are in the forefront in the attacks or
being attacked in Syria at present. To their credit, American officials are
not very enthusiastic about intervening in Syria perhaps due to that dreadful
fact. But to these western governments, or Arab countries, especially the Gulf
Cooperation countries, or Turkey thrown in, Assad represents their nemesis as
well as the key to defang and defeat Iran. With Assad gone, Hezbollah's
aggressiveness or their sense of invincibility will be much reduced. At things
stand, Iran never felt so confident. It's well established in Iraq with a
Shiite government in power (it's unlikely the Sunni minority can muster the
strength to challenge the Shiite government for a long time); it's actively
working with the Taliban, and may be even with the Kabul government, against
NATO in Afghanistan.
At present Iran is safe. Syria is safe. Despite the departure of the Khaled
Meshaal, Hamas' defacto leader, which the western media or governments used to
discredit Assad, Hamas had become a client of Egypt under the influence of
another Muslim Brotherhood. It also remains under the influence of Iran and
ready to carry out its bidding. Moreover, Khaled Meshaal seemed to have lost
the absolute power he once wielded. His well-publicized deal with Palestinian
Authority president Mahmoud Abbas, in which he agreed to Abbas remaining as
president and becoming the prime minister in the proposed new unity
government, was not enthusiastically endorsed by the authorities on the ground
in Gaza.
At this moment in time, nothing much the west or the MB-dominated oposition in
Syria could do, except wait. Wait or hope for the crack in Hamas
leadership.
If they wish to do 'a Libya' to Syria quicker, they need to work to enhance
the disagreement or division among Hamas leaders. Hamas is one of the chinks
in Iran's armor.
But Iran's foes, Assad's foes, or Hamas' foes, should hold their breath for a
moment. The division, let alone the breakup of Hamas, is not a sure thing;
inevitable or imminent. Don't forget this is a terrorist organization. Its aim
is to destroy Israel. Other matters don't count or matter. They have so much
difference with the West even if they do break up, their loyalty stays with
terrorism and destruction of Israel. It's all right for the West to indulge in
a day dream of the breakup of one of Iran's proxies, but in reality it's just
a disagreement according to some Hamas leaders. It, they are confident, can be
resolved through lawyers. So there you have it. They intend to patch things
up. But irrespective of what is going to happen, or what Hamas leaders decide,
the leadership on the ground seems to have a sway for those in exile. And the
Hamas in Gaza depends on Iranian largess to make its payrolls in Gaza.
But on the other hand, if Iran becomes another North Korea and explodes a
nuclear bomb, and uses denial or silence or stealth to elude discovery until
it has successfully tested a nuclear device, everything is changed. So far
Iran seems unstoppable. It denies it's making a bomb; so how to stop it? What
president Obama said was true when he said if Iran really wanted to build
nuclear bombs, they can. "What we can do to their ambition to emulate North
Korea, is to delay it. Not stop it," he said. "The only way," according to
Obama, "to stop the Iranian project of weapons of mass destruction is to coax
them to stop it themselves. Like Col. Qaddafi of Libya agreed to former
president George W. Bush's advice to dismantle and cancel his nuclear bomb
project." Except that nothing good came out of that listening to Bush. In
fact, Iran was watching and came to the conclusion that Qaddafi erred; and he
paid for it with his life. So Iran may go for North Korean's example instead,
which was better. They could secretly research, develop through trial and
errors and then explode a few nuclear bombs, which they could deny as
vigorously as they could that they were nuclear bombs, at first, but later
admit they were. They could claim it was for peaceful purposes, though!
So far the North Koreans, or their beloved young great leader, are not in
imminent danger. Except for the rice or food aid promised by Washington may be
suspended for a while. Who cares for the rice or food aid? National pride is
more important. Already they have nuclear bombs. Now they are going to send a
satellite into space on their giant rocket, which they can also use to send
nuclear bombs in the future after they have successfully managed to
miniaturize them enough to be fitted to the rocket tips.
Washington, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines took note of the North's
intention. But only Japan warned North Korea their missiles or any parts may
be shot down if they are deemed headed for its territory, while the North
declared if that happened it would consider that act as an act of war
(declaration of wars). But I don't think Japan or any country, even the US,
for that matter, will go that far. Don't forget North Korea has nuclear
weapons. Primitive may be, but still nuclear bombs.
The North Koreans may threaten the US with an intent to drop the first bomb on
the South, the easiest. It just has to load it on its military plane, fly it
over to Seoul and drop it (like the Americans dropped theirs on Japan during
WW2. Of course, the Obama administration would likely put North Korea's
leadership on notice, there will be retaliation in kind, which will mean the
end of the young beloved leader, if not the whole of North Korea. Will the
North be crazy enough do it? Will President Obama make good his threat? I
think nobody even dare to calculate. Only President Obama knows what he will
do, will not do, have to do. He alone decides.
So, in view of that, I believe President Assad is safe, at least for now. No
matter how many egged him to intervene in Syria, which the US has the power
to, Obama could not relish the idea of intervening in every country that
everyone wants him to. "We just can't intervene in every country in the world,
" were his own words. "Tempting, but no! In Libya it was different. The world
was united then; and Libya was much smaller, weaker, poorly equipped country -
doable."
The Syrian army is ranked sixth in the world. Numbering 320, 000 excluding the
reservists. What's more, they have sophisticated air defenses, large
stockpiles of chemical weapons and nerve gas.
In an all out war with the US, if it comes to that, there is no doubt who will
win; but there is also no doubt, we will pay a high price. It has become clear
that if left alone, President Assad will easily triumph over his opponents,
Muslim Brotherhood or not.[PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/04/12/11164024-syria-a-chink-
in-iranian-armor]
Shooting spree in Tulsa, Okla should not be labelled a hate crime
After reading these comments about whites killing blacks, targeting blacks,
or blacks killing blacks, or why would whites be so stupid as to go into black
neighborhood to kill blacks where he won't be able to escape, and some
replied..."there are whites who go to black areas to buy drugs and sex," I
found most of these posts don't make sense.
Whatever your position is somebody is bound to come up with an argument
to debunk it. Then you get the urge to answer and hit back. Back and forth;
and when you have a hell lot of people (more than a thousand) who are blacks
and whites hammering away at their keyboards, a lot of feelings will be roiled
and bruised.
to debunk it. Then you get the urge to answer and hit back. Back and forth;
and when you have a hell lot of people (more than a thousand) who are blacks
and whites hammering away at their keyboards, a lot of feelings will be roiled
and bruised.
Some wrote with wisdom and moderation. Thank God. But most were
uncompromising. They were blacks and they're not in the mood to forgive
'whites' for doing this to 'blacks.'
uncompromising. They were blacks and they're not in the mood to forgive
'whites' for doing this to 'blacks.'
While white writers were beside themselves with indignation when fingers were
pointed at a 'white' man in a white truck, implying that the perpetrator or
perpetrators were white. When a local council official was asked by
reporters, if he thought this was a hate crime (whites attacking blacks), he
had the audacity to say: "Yes, absolutely!" I wonder if the councilor was
black? We all are responsible for this disunity; we are all guilty of
unrestrained in our behavior, thinking. We want bloodshed, we love chaos and
mayhems. That's why we stop to witness a road accident; we love to see
bloodshed, others' blood. We will never lift a finger to help the victims but
only want to watch. That's who we are. And many on this Newsvine
discussion.
pointed at a 'white' man in a white truck, implying that the perpetrator or
perpetrators were white. When a local council official was asked by
reporters, if he thought this was a hate crime (whites attacking blacks), he
had the audacity to say: "Yes, absolutely!" I wonder if the councilor was
black? We all are responsible for this disunity; we are all guilty of
unrestrained in our behavior, thinking. We want bloodshed, we love chaos and
mayhems. That's why we stop to witness a road accident; we love to see
bloodshed, others' blood. We will never lift a finger to help the victims but
only want to watch. That's who we are. And many on this Newsvine
discussion.
Some feel because being privileged with the ability to write, they want to
show the world what they can do with words. And they don't mince their words.
Some even took the opportunity to praise President Obama and hammered the GOP
and the Teapartiers who had no idea what hit them! My own take is, well, we
should use restrain. We have no idea, the police said they had no evidence
that this was a hate crime; so until we do, it's best we refrain from judging
whites, blacks or Hispanics.
As for the statements by the black survivors that they saw a white man in a
white truck, or that it was a white man in a white truck (they didn't say the
white man did it, they just saw the white man there), I call them mere
speculations. That's what they were. Even if there was a white man in a white
truck, it didn't mean we had identified the shooter or shooters already. It
means we are anxious to nail the suspects, so bad we didn't care we just
speculated. Just as the person who took the opportunity to stump for Obama's
reelection in November when that person injected Obama good deeds and dumb
deeds of the GOP into this discussion about murder! Even Israel was not
spared!
white truck, or that it was a white man in a white truck (they didn't say the
white man did it, they just saw the white man there), I call them mere
speculations. That's what they were. Even if there was a white man in a white
truck, it didn't mean we had identified the shooter or shooters already. It
means we are anxious to nail the suspects, so bad we didn't care we just
speculated. Just as the person who took the opportunity to stump for Obama's
reelection in November when that person injected Obama good deeds and dumb
deeds of the GOP into this discussion about murder! Even Israel was not
spared!
Personally I am not sure if the man, white man, in the white truck, was
the culprit. For all I know, the white man may happen to be in the area for a
reason - not necessarily to commit murders. He may be lost and was asking for
direction. Who knows? Ya, I also am curious what these people were doing
loitering about after midnight? It's too early to say anything for sure. If
you want to speculate (don't we all), be my guests. [PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/04/08/11080654-shooting-spree-
in-tulsa-okla-should-not-be-labelled-a-hate-crime]
the culprit. For all I know, the white man may happen to be in the area for a
reason - not necessarily to commit murders. He may be lost and was asking for
direction. Who knows? Ya, I also am curious what these people were doing
loitering about after midnight? It's too early to say anything for sure. If
you want to speculate (don't we all), be my guests. [PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/04/08/11080654-shooting-spree-
in-tulsa-okla-should-not-be-labelled-a-hate-crime]
Iran's ambition or Iran itself may be a goner if...
Iran's nuclear ambition, or even Iran itself, may be a goner. Just my humble
opinion. You see, if the West, especially led by the US, says come clean, Iran
should choose to listen. It's not wise to defy the West. They should recall
what happened to Libya. Fresh from victory in Libya, though bogged down in
Afghanistan, NATO knows what it can do. No way, anybody (country) could match
the strength and destructive force of NATO. As amply demonstrated in Libya,
they can bomb any country back to the stone age!
Iran's saber-rattling means nothing to the West. After Libya, the West
knows, NATO deters; and Iran is fully aware of that. But don't underestimate
the Persian minds and cunningness. Their empire once ruled half the world,
remember. They might spring a surprise yet. I don't count on Iran giving up
their favorite dream. Their goal is damned too near, tempting, to stop now.
That's why they agree to negotiate anytime as long as it's not about uranium
refining or enrichment (the material they need for making nuclear bombs).
And you know what, the Americans actually have no desire to stop Iran racing
towards its goal (of joning Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea in the
exclusive nuclear club). They have said as much. The American intelligence
agency still stubbornly sticks to its finding that Iran has not decided to
move towards making nuclear bombs, and seems unlikely it ever will.
knows, NATO deters; and Iran is fully aware of that. But don't underestimate
the Persian minds and cunningness. Their empire once ruled half the world,
remember. They might spring a surprise yet. I don't count on Iran giving up
their favorite dream. Their goal is damned too near, tempting, to stop now.
That's why they agree to negotiate anytime as long as it's not about uranium
refining or enrichment (the material they need for making nuclear bombs).
And you know what, the Americans actually have no desire to stop Iran racing
towards its goal (of joning Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea in the
exclusive nuclear club). They have said as much. The American intelligence
agency still stubbornly sticks to its finding that Iran has not decided to
move towards making nuclear bombs, and seems unlikely it ever will.
How do they know? Of course, these American officials don't know. They just
speculated. If they were so knowing as they say they are, how come North Korea
managed to test a nuclear bomb under their nose without being stopped? Did
they approve (permit) North Korea to have nuclear weapon? After this debacle,
what right the Americans have to stop Iran from trying to emulate the North
Koreans? What's their argument against Iran? But Iran is in dilemma. It cannot
argue that the West practice double standard. Any way putting it, Iran will
end up the loser. Either the Israelis will reduce their nuclear facilities to
rubble or the West will tell them to dismantle them. Because the West is
having the upper hand here. Although they may have failed to stop - or
permitted - the North Koreans, it's their prerogative to allow or disallow any
country to have nuclear weapons.
speculated. If they were so knowing as they say they are, how come North Korea
managed to test a nuclear bomb under their nose without being stopped? Did
they approve (permit) North Korea to have nuclear weapon? After this debacle,
what right the Americans have to stop Iran from trying to emulate the North
Koreans? What's their argument against Iran? But Iran is in dilemma. It cannot
argue that the West practice double standard. Any way putting it, Iran will
end up the loser. Either the Israelis will reduce their nuclear facilities to
rubble or the West will tell them to dismantle them. Because the West is
having the upper hand here. Although they may have failed to stop - or
permitted - the North Koreans, it's their prerogative to allow or disallow any
country to have nuclear weapons.
Because the western powers possess the means to destroy any country that defy
them. If, however, Iran manages to fool the West through delaying tactics
while they race to come up with a nuclear explosion (like North Korea), and
actually conducts a nuclear test, they could hope to deter the West by
threatening to drop - not deliver through ballistic missiles, which is not
believable or possible yet - a bomb on Saudi Arabia or Bahrain where the
American Fifth Fleet is stationed, Iran might get away with it or anything.
Otherwise, NATO rules![PERMALINK
them. If, however, Iran manages to fool the West through delaying tactics
while they race to come up with a nuclear explosion (like North Korea), and
actually conducts a nuclear test, they could hope to deter the West by
threatening to drop - not deliver through ballistic missiles, which is not
believable or possible yet - a bomb on Saudi Arabia or Bahrain where the
American Fifth Fleet is stationed, Iran might get away with it or anything.
Otherwise, NATO rules![PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/04/08/11080604-irans-ambition-
or-iran-itself-may-be-a-goner-if]
or-iran-itself-may-be-a-goner-if]
Afghanistan is like hell (for American soldiers)
President Obama is absolutely right. End of story.
But it seems someone or some people want to prolong the story.
There's no reason for NATO or coalition forces to lie or hush up things if
they had found more than one soldier was involved unless they believed that by
lying only one Sgt. Robert Bales carried out the massacre the fallout would be
less damaging to the coalition's standing in the eyes of Afghan government or
people.
So far this was not the case.
At the same time the Afghan side seemed to reject NATO's investigation or
explanation out right and in a way tried to inject additional information
that's not there earlier into the massacre.
Perhaps as opposed to the conclusion by American investigators which they (the
Afghans) suspected was put forward to lessen the anger against American
servicemen, the Afghan side came out with a story that was intended to stoke
fury against foreign forces.
It's plain as a sunny day, someone or people didn't want us to have it easy in
there; they want us to leave, the sooner the better. They can't stand the
sight of our men and women any more, and if they can't make us leave they
would kill us one by one.
They are in fact bidding their time. And can't wait to see the American G.I.s
or NATO leave.
They don't want us or anything from us. Whatever training or aid we gave them
they accepted, yes. Why not? But to be grateful and repay our good deeds with
good deeds such as friendliness, etc., never.
Although it used to be that they didn't care whether the Americans stay or
leave; now they wished we would leave as soon as possible.
Just look at their president, Hamid Karzai. Every time he opens his mouth is to
chide the American side, trying his best to show how ungrateful he is.
When some French soldiers were killed recently and French president blurted
out he wanted to withdraw France's contribution earlier, President Karzai
pretended to sympathise with President Sarkozy called for the withdrawl of
foreign forces from Afghanistan earlier than the set date of end of 2014. And
he never condemned the Afghan perpetrators who killed NATO soldiers; but if
the Americans coalition soldiers ever hurt an Afghan fly, even a fly, he will
be in forefront protesting. And he will demand the American soldiers should
not operate at certain villages, or be restricted to certain areas.
>br/>
It's hard to believe why Obama wants to prolong the war which is not winnable.
Why do something we don't need to. What's stopping the US government from
withdrawing the troops from Afghanistan; or at least turn over the duty of
security enforcement to the Afghans? Because we set the date of 2014 and had
to abide by it?If that's the case, it's the biggest blunder the American
administration can make. We worry the Afghans will not be ready to take care
of their own security? The Afghans are as ready now, have been for years, as
they will be when the 2014 comes. Actually we worry too much. Tell me if I am
wrong, I have never noticed any worry shown by the Afghan side at all.
It's obvious they are neither excited about us being in their country or us
chasing baddies in their villages or nor sad when we leave , for that
matter.
Of course it'll be irresponsible for President Obama to abandon Afghanistan if
it's sure to lead it to a disaster, the same thing like to hand over an asylum
seeker back to his original country if he's likely to be tortured or killed.
But if President Hamid Karzai's actions or statements are any indications,
he's not in danger of being toppled soon after we leave. I think he has
already made some arrangement to ensure he continues to lead Afghanistan for a
foreseeable future.
I think he has put his eggs in more than one basket.
If I were him, I would have appointed my own loyal people to all important
posts in the government. Like what Prime minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq had
done (to ensure his survival).
President Obama will not be failing in his duty even if he withdraws American
forces at the end of this year. Don't worry he'll not leave Afghan army or
police in bad shape or good shape if he ends the involvement now or end of
2014. It made no difference.
Remember, the condition on the ground is changing everyday. Three years ago,
we seldom heard of Afghan soldiers meaning us harm; now killing of American
officers or soldiers by their Afghan comrades is normal. Now the Americans
have become targets of both the Taliban and Afghan army. How are they going to
operate in the environment where they have to risk their lives against not
only their enemies but against their (Afghan) comrades? In short, Afghanistan
is like hell or at any rate like my own mental picture of hell, for our
troops. Most of the things one imagines in hell are there - hatred, betrayal,
explosion, confusion, hopelessness, anger, grief, pain, torture, death, greed,
and treachery.[PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/03/30/10941025-afghanistan-is-
like-hell-for-american-soldiers]
North Korea Wanted to Launch a Satellite
When breaking news was splashed on front pages across the globe about North
Korea under the new leadership of the young son, agreeing to halt all works of
its nuclear project in exchange for food donation from the US, a lot of people
(especially liberal people on NBC Newsvine) started touting the success of
sanctions or diplomacy as advocated by President Obama instead of airstrikes,
or threat of airstrikes (as advocated by Israel) against Iran for its race to
build a nuclear bomb.
They were quick to cite the success of apparent climb down of the North
Koreans who can be said to be even more recalcitrant than the Iranians.
It proved that diplomacy does work; and President Obama deserves every credit
for his vision and farsightedness which paid off.
That North Korea, under the new leadership of the late beloved leader's young
son, had agreed to forego its nuclear ambition and to stop all related
works.
That's it? North Korea had mended its ways? Just like that? North Korea said
they wanted food aid for its hungry people and, if their requests are met,
they would make sure we would have no more problem from them, and we believe
them?
Let me ask this: since when North Korea had kept its words? How many times it
had agreed with the US and US fell for them and every time we had been left
high and dry?
I know we all love to be praised or love to shower praise on our leader we
admire; but it's ridiculous to heave praise on ourselves for job well done
just because the North Korean seemed to show sincerity (this time), only to be
had again, as usual.
They hoped to use the same approach with Iran: no airstrikes or threats of
airstrikes but to use diplomacy to talk sense into them to agree to volunteer
to stop on their own.
But as everyone knows saying is not the same thing as doing.
For North Korea to issue statements agreeing they would cooperate with
Washington (if enough food to feed its hungry millions was donated in
exchange) costs them nothing. Words are free. They can repeat the same
performance anytime they want.
After what Obama supporters thought Obama had done it again (after he had
ordered the elimination of Osama Bin Ladin), the North Korean announced they
wanted to launch a satellite!
What that means? It means they wanted to improve their rocket systems under
the disguise of putting a satellite into space, which of course is within
North Korea's right as a sovereign nation.
It also means North Korea had out maneuvered the West again.
And now I am sure Iran can't wait to agree to Obama's well tested approach of
diplomacy, too. The question is in exchange for what?
They most probably would want us to leave Assad alone. Can we do that? What
about the Syrian opposition battling Assad? Do they matter?
Okay, let's look at the bigger picture (as they say). The Syrian opposition be
damned. We say. If they don't see the bigger picture, too bad. Let them perish
at the hands of Assad' army.
Won't the Israelis protest? Who cares, we say, let them protest until the cows
come home, right? Do we send our joint Chief of Staff General Martin E.
Dempsey to assure the Israeli prime minister that all is well and shall end
well? That they can forget about preemptive strikes. They are unnecessary. He
would impress on the Israelis they would set back the Iranians may be only 5
to 10 years. Not to mention the retaliation by Iran that would follow.
The General also would brief the Jewish state on the success of our dealing
with North Korea using diplomacy. In that the North Korean themselves agree to
stop all nuclear projects or activities even without saber rattling from
us.
It's like we killed two birds with one stone! We stopped Iran from becoming a
nuclear power, and also avoided being coaxed by the Gulf states and Turkey to
repeat what we did in Libya in Syria.
Thanks to the wise approach of diplomacy and some sanctions, the Middle East
was spared from imminent conflagration.
So everybody was happy. No more problem. Obama went on to get reelected in
November!
And that was that?
No!
Then..it happened! The whole world was stunned. Iran had detonated its nuclear
bomb (a device as powerful as the ones dropped on Japan during the 2nd world
war), at last!
The whole world including Europe and America found themselves rocking on their
foundation; their leaders delirious with anger, bewilderment, disappointment,
embarrasstment or shame for allowing their nemesises to beat them at their own
games.
First, the North Koreans wanted to experiment to improve their ballistic
missile systems but adeptly fooled everyone into believing that they wanted to
launch a satellite.
For Iran, once it has joined Pakistan and India in the the exclusive nuclear
club, it can do as it pleases; not necessarily wiping out the Jewish state from
the map, as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad often threatened, though![PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/03/25/10853311-north-
koreawanted-to-launch-a-satellite]
Secular Or Islamic Do We Want ..?
Most of us here have largely missed the point.
It's a battle between the Syrian government and the Muslim Brotherhood; as
always has been. And Syria is not the first place, nor the last, I am afraid,
where the MB wants to overthrow the government and impose their own Islamic
system or Sharia instead.
I mention impose because for these clergymen or imams, their goal is not to be
allowed to pray five times per day in peace without interference, wherever
they live, by anybody - but also want others to adopt their ways too.
That's, to me, the Muslim Brotherhood; and if they cannot convert you they
will kill you. Oh, I have heard of the moderate Muslims, too.
Yes, there are moderates Muslims everywhere! No doubt about it. They are
moderates in the situations like this: when they are a tiny minority; when
they want to marry you or court you - they will say or do anything to make you
fall for them. Once married (and all persons of any faith must embrace Islam
if you want to marry a Muslim), you are trapped. They may stop being nice too
if there is no reason to. When you realize your naivete, or folly, it's too
late. You cannot get out of Islam. It's not allowed. Some had to resign to
their fate until death.
But if you talk to western women (mostly British) aid workers in foreign
lands, who had been abducted, and who were forced by fear of death and torture
to become Muslims while in captivity, it's a different story. These women have
been forced to read or study the Koran by their captors, if they want to live
or suffer less inhumane treatment. Many chose to obey and came out in one
piece. Some, if not most, even went on to accept their new faith in the
end.
If you bad-mouth Islam to them, you can expect these women (at least) to walk
away. Since they are no loner under the threat of pain, their defense of Islam
wherever they go is genuine.
In a way, they are grateful that Islam had saved them. To these women only
Islam could save them and would do anything for Islam as long as they
live.
And these converts effectively represent the moderate face of Islam.
They are the real moderate Muslims. Not born Muslims who try to impress on you
they are moderates.
Now how one defines a Muslim as moderate? Is the ruler of Saudi Arabia who has
been a staunch ally of the United States in the on-going Arab Spring,
moderate?
Compare the king with President Assad of Syria: who is moderate? How about
some clue? In Syria, under Assad, you can bring your bible anywhere. Caution:
Don't do that in Saudi Arabia. I am not saying anything. Just..don't do
that.
There you have it. It's the desire or business of all Muslims to covert people
of other religions to their faith - and not vice versa. One-way street for
them and us.
In a Muslim country, Islam holds sway over all other people. Muslims are not
allowed to eat 'unclean' things such animals have to be slaughtered according
to Islamic way, non-Muslims are considered 'unclean'. That's why you need to
become a Muslim in order to marry a Muslim that's final.
Now where were we? Oh, Syria massacres its own people. Are we sure that Assad
is not killing armed terrorists as he calls them? Are we to accept whatever
the Syrian opposition dish out to us, line and sinker? Is Assad that bad? What
about the Sunny men and equipment pouring in from Iraq and Libya? What about
sabotage by Turkey and its harboring of anti-Assad protesters? And the Arab
League? The Gulf Cooperation countries led by Qatar and Saudi Arabia?
As everyone who can read knows these countries and their leaders are not
angels themselves.
Take Bahrain, where the Americans have their fifth fleet, the Sunny king have
been suppressing his Shia majority subjects for a long time.
During the recent, biggest so far, demonstration, Bahrain found itself rocking
on its foundation, and had to call on Saudi Arabia for help to crush the
uprising.
While I am not condoning Assad in his efforts to suppress the rebellion with
whatever he has at his disposal, and regrettably many innocent men, women and
children have been killed, I think it'll be a big mistake to work to getting
rid of Assad. How do we know the heart-wrenching pictures received by the
British and American media are genuine; that those mangled bodies of old men,
women and children are killed by Assad forces? And not killed by the rebels
themselves and heap the blame on Assad? Even the purportedly leaked emails of
Assad that were pushed by anti-Assad opposition group had seemed suspicious,
but still had been accepted as genuine by the Guardian newspaper, saying it
had done some checking itself and found them to be authentic.
But I am not surprised. But it just sprang to my mind that nowsdays British
newspapers have become very competitive. Extremely competitive, if I may say
so. Remember the scandals of British Tabloid newspapers hacking into people's
phones or, when police reports were made and investigation begun, bribing the
cops? They will do anything to find stories for their readers, won't they?
Back to Syria compared to the Saudi kingdom. At least, under Assad everyone
can lead his own life the way he wishes and practices his own chosen
religion.
That's why it's not easy for Assad to fall. Most ordinary and peaceful people
will not abandon Assad; he's a known devil, compared to what might turn up
once Assad is gone.
Look at Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood there had been trying for years to
propagate their ideology to the Egyptian people with little success; not until
the Cairo demonstrators' excesses messed things up. By then the MB had already
got what they longed for (the departure of President Mubarak), and they
cleverly and quietly distanced themselves from the relentless protests. They
were afraid of backlash from the Egyptians (the silent majority) who might
become fed up with the continuing violence and what seemed incessant demands
by the revolutionary youths.
And they were right.
While the internet savvy demonstrators were viewed with admiration for what
they had done and achieved, at first, they soon lost the support of the people
when their demands became more and more extreme.
On the contrary, in the meanwhile the Muslim Brotherhood had been quietly
working to convince the Egyptians, including the Coptic Christian Egyptians
they mean no harm.
Though they were grateful to the youngsters for paving the way for the MB to
be a force to be reckoned with at last - its rightful place in Egyptian
society - there was no love lost between them when it called for a stop to the
endless demonstrations which were bad for Egyptian economy and disruptive to
people's life.
This pro-Egypt and concern for the people's welfare got, as intended, the MB
into the good book of the Egyptians in general. And couple that with its
mosque pulpit sermons that those who didn't vote for the MB would not go to
heaven but to hell, the Muslim Brotherhood easily won the first vote post
Mubarak. The hundreds of thousands - not even a million, out the total
population of 80 million, who claimed to be the 'people' of Egypt to demand
Mubarak's ouster- who went in with the record of being responsible for
toppling the former dictator were rejected by the Egyptian people.
Their aspiration of a train of change had puffed to a stop without any steam
left; their dream revolution had vanished into thin air!
Of course, the picture now in Egypt was far from rosy. But I don't intend to
go into that.
Suffice to say that this clamoring for Assad to go doesn't make sense at all.
It's like jumping from the pan into the fire, maybe worse.
Personally I don't know if Assad could survive. But I do know the MB is not
going to give up, until they capture Syria. It will be a matter of time for
them they believe. They have the patience and resources to wait or fight. So
far they have done remarkably well, (with western powers' help). Within a
short period of time they were done with their foes in Tunisia, Libya and
Egypt, and very much hopeful they would prevail in Syria too, and elsewhere!
[PERMALINK
https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/03/21/10789225-secular-or-
islamic-do-we-want]
president was a liar? The editor seemed to have chosen sides. Why? To be https://syriainturmoil.newsvine.com/_news/2012/03/21/10789225-secular-or-
islamic-do-we-want]
in the good book...? Do you wish to know more? [Source]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment