Posts Tagged ‘USA’

West, a trembling hive of Hypocrisy

August 28, 2018

Western,  especially the US’s, virtues are tailored to justify hegemonic policies, wars and covert activities.Where,

Attacking Blacks is Racism.

Attacking a country is Terrorism                                                                                                (Except when attacked by a western country or Israel)

Attacking Homosexuality is Homophobia

Attacking women is Gender discrimination

Attacking Jews is Semitism

Questioning holocaust is still forbidden in some countries.

But, attacking Islam, Qura’an, Muslims and the Prophet, is all a fair game, as it mysteriously, in a snap, changes to, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, EXPRESSION.

Recently a ray of hope, however, has surfaced on the barren wilderness of the west; 

ECtHR decision to uphold the decision of A Vienna court convicted her in 2011 of disparaging religious doctrines, to an Austrian woman in her late 40s where she was fined $547 plus legal costs, declaring that “The Strasbourg-based ECHR ruled that insulting Islamic prophet Muhammad “goes beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate” and “could stir up prejudice and put at risk religious peace.”

The ECHR said the Austrian court’s decision “served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace.” The court also said the woman’s comments were not objective, failed to provide historical background and had no intention of promoting public debate.              

The Dutch government has sought to distance itself from Wilders’ contest, with Prime Minister Mark Rutte calling it provocative, but saying that there were protections of freedom of speech in the Netherlands.

“The aim is to provoke rather than to force a debate about Islam,” Rutte said this week. “Wilders is a politician who provokes and he is free to do”


Read related article:-

Re-alignments in the Middle East, In the wake of, Receding West.

June 19, 2018



Image result for Receding shores ?

The Arab–Israeli conflict was primarily seen, for many decades, as a conflict between Arab-states and Israel, rather than between Muslims and Israel. Periphery doctrine; an Israeli foreign-policy strategy; was used by P.M Ben Gurion to develop close alliances with Non-Arab Muslim states in the Middle East, to counter the united opposition of Arab states to the illegitimate existence of the state of Israel.

 Contemporary politicking is characterized by uncertainties, low probabilities for good and high consequences in terms of deceit, destruction, and miseries.

 Strategic-interests of the Israeli government converged with those of the Turkish and Iranian governments of the time. Turkey’s (Military lead government) sought integration with the free-market economies and democracies of Europe, a member of NATO and the EU. The Shah of Iran, being a major ally of the United States, facilitated the dialogue between Israel, Iran and Turkey.

In 1950, both Turkey and Iran became the first, and for a long time, the only Muslim states to have diplomatic relations with Israel. Both Turkey and Iran developed extensive military cooperation.  During the 1967 Six-Day War, Iran supplied Israel with essential oil and petroleum. Israel helped in the industrial and military development in Turkey and Iran.

With the rise of Arab nationalism under Nasser in the sixties the relationship between Iran and the Arab world started deteriorating (The Persian Gulf was dubbed as “Arabian” Gulf).  This further strengthened the relationship between Israel and Iran.

The overthrow of the Shah of Iran in 1979 was a major setback to Periphery Doctrine. The Islamic regime of Ruhollah Khomeini severed relations with Israel. Ironically, however, throughout the 1980s no one in Israel said anything about or considered Iran a threat—the word wasn’t even uttered.

During the peak of the Persian Empire, Jews are thought to have comprised as much as 20% of the population. Jews trace their heritage in Iran to the Babylonian Exile of the 6th century BC and have retained their ethnic, linguistic, and religious identity. Now their number, however, has dwindled to mere 9000.

Zionist Organization was first established in Persia by the Jewish elders and Rabbis. The Jews of Persia understood that “Zion” is the biblical name of Jerusalem and Zionism demonstrates the end of exile and the beginning of redemption.

Rumors, during the time of Hitler, cropped up in Iran that Hitler has secretly converted to Islam and has taken the name Heydar (the title of Imam Ali). What made, European and Jews, panic was that Hitler is planning to reveal his true religion after defeating the deceitful British, the godless Russians and the Jews.

Unfortunately, the Bible has a little good to say about Gentiles (and barely any about Jews) with the exception of Cyrus the Great; who was the first Zionist, yet exalted in the Bible. Persians and Medes, according to Old Testament, are the only people who hadn’t oppressed Jews or committed atrocities against them. There was Jewish royalty in Iran, including Queen Esther, buried there (as are Daniel and Mordecai). Iran, thus, logically, becomes the second holiest land in Judaism.  Israel, nevertheless, is Iran’s arch-enemy always conspiring to destroy or at least weaken it.

Is there any possibility of a raproshma between the two?

It seems too late. The chances, by far, are getting slimmer by every passing day; for the World’s naiveté, despite all the neo-conic, fascist and populist strategies employed by the retreating west, is eroding. Iran, despite being a pariah ( Shia’a state), is increasingly gaining acceptance in the comity of nations as a Muslim-dominated, relation-worthy sovereign state. Bedouin Pentagon, on the other hand, is losing its Shia’a-Sunni (sectarian) tug of war.

It would have been most probable if the Palestinian state was created and the West’s fosterage of Israel forsaken; to let it exist and grow on its own; cultivating relationships on mutuality, rather than arms twisting by its sugar daddy—the USA.

On the other hand, ironically, in the vein of strange realism, Western Intelligentsia and the Academia have already started contemplating and discussing the Post-Israel-Middle East.

After the Iranian revolution in 1979, the country set out to export its brand of revolutionary Islam. As Iran became an Islamic republic, Sunni Islamists were not only jealous of the triumph of the Shia’a Imamate (State) but became even more determined to establish their version of the Islamic state.

The relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran has oscillated between indifference, hostility, rapprochement and tension over the decades. Prince MBS appears determined to intensify the rivalry with Iran as he continues to raise Riyadh’s concerns over Iranian expansion in the Arab world and beyond.

Saudi Arabia exported Wahhabi Islam, to counter Iranian revolutionary Islam, across Africa, Asia and even Europe. Saudis are notorious for stoking sectarianism. The two countries entered a fierce battle over the souls of Muslims with Saudi clerics augmenting their anti-Shiite rhetoric and the Iranian counterparts playing down their Shiism to appeal to Pan-Islamic, anti-imperial and anti-Western sentiments among Muslims. Saudi Arabia, despite President Obama’s realistic understanding of the Middle Eastern issues, continued pressing the USA to bomb Iran.

The Saudis see the resurgence of the Iranian influence as a revival of the Old Persian nationalism. Blowing-up the Iranian threat magnifies MBS’s role as the savior of Bedouin-Pentagon from Persianization and Shiification.

Saudis see the brutal war in Yemen, where the Shia’a-Houthis are supported by Iran, as a battle for survival for the Saudi nation and the hegemony of Arabness over Persianization. Prince MBS’s Vision 2030 for the Kingdom excludes Iran from the greater regional integration with the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Egypt and Israel.

Muta’a Doctrine (marriage of convenience) in Politics

During the Cold War, Saudi Arabia and Iran worked together with the United States against the Soviet Union. They accepted a division of labor: Iran provided military capabilities; Saudi Arabia provided theological ammunition and funding against the Soviet Union. Now Iran is replaced as a new enemy for the Soviet Union and Israel as a friend for Iran. A toxic nexus has emerged between the US, Saudi Arabia and Zionist Israel in the rapidly changing situation in the Muslim East. Saudis maintained discreet relations with the Zionist-Israel, hiding this illicit relationship from the Muslim World. Now, however, they arrogantly flaunt it as a badge of honor due to the changed political compulsions.

As is already well-known; the Saudi and Israeli common cause against perceived Iranian influence and expansion; in places like Syria, Lebanon and Iraq of late has forced the historic bitter enemies down a path of cooperation as both seem to have placed the breakup of the so-called “Shia’a crescent” as their primary policy goal in the region at any cost. For Israel, Hezbollah, seen as an Iranian proxy contingent, has long been its greatest foe, present right up against the Jewish state’s northern border.

This new arrangement, on the one hand, mitigates the Kingdom’s fear of losing its role as the “loyal regional villain”, while, strengthening the “Triangle of Hate” on the other. Saudis have presented the Islamic awakening, sweeping the Muslim East, an Iranian inspired plot.

Saudi Arabia, despite the huge reduction in its oil revenues, is trying to maintain its role as a “cash cow” and the “lynchpin of America’s Muslim East policy”. Saudi Arabia’s worst nightmare is the fear of American abandonment for a new regional partner. This will bring Saudi Arabia’s relevance, regionally and globally, to naught.


The rise of the  Justice Development Party of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the 2000s led to a steady deterioration in Israel–Turkey relations. Unlike, previous Turkish governments, Erdogan’s government openly condemned Israel’s policies towards Palestine and blamed it for the conflict. Relations between Sunni-Turkey and Shia’a-Iran are on the rise.





Demonizing, Repressing a Religious Minority!

December 19, 2017




A classically American approach that protects the many religious streams running together to form the American cultural heritage rather than damming one in favor of another. As historian Denise Spellberg observes of Thomas Jefferson’s view of Islam, “In the formation of the American ideal and principles of what we consider to be exceptional American values, Muslims were, at the beginning, the litmus test for whether the reach of American constitutional principles would include every believer, every kind, or not.” Jefferson didn’t care for Islam (or any organized religion, for that matter). But he understood that America would be stronger if citizens favoring one stream of its heritage vigorously argued its merits without seeking to place legal limits on those arguing for the merits of a different stream.

Denise A. Spellberg (born c. 1958) is an American scholar of Islamic history. She is an associate professor of history and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. Spellberg holds a BA from Smith College (1980) and a Ph.D. (1989) from Columbia University.


Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of ‘A’isha Bint Abi Bakr. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.

Thomas Jefferson’s Qur’an: Islam and the Founders, New York: Knopf, October 1, 2013; ISBN 978-0307268228

Hawks are getting itchy to commandeer the Mid East Revolution.

March 12, 2011

Life, Money, self development
life, enrichment, financial freedom, easy life, illumination.

« why Muslims are Shari’a averse?Hawks Are Getting Itchy To Commandeer The Mid East Revolution.
By shakir2

Author/Political analyst. Tunisian revolution almost went unnoticed under our nose until it was all over and Ben Ali was camped in Saudi Arabia.But then Egyptian saga stirred us from the slumber and we were wide awake and started taking stock of the events there. Media, especially CNN went berserk as if the revolution is happening right here on the home turf–USA. It however, deserves the credit of extensive and very difficult coverage of the every second developing and

unfolding there.

Now it is Libya, which, as compared to Tunisia and Egypt, is proving to be much tougher and bloody. The reason forthat, probably, is that Libyan

Dictator (Now-who was an Arab/African Leader untill few days ago) is proving to be hard nut to crack and seems to be consolidating his stronghold

effectively. How long would he be able to cling on to the power is any body’s guess.

The revolution. However, seems becoming everyday’s routine, spreading the ripple effects, eroding the status-quo alongwith the secret arrangements made with the dictators on the block. It is clearly evident that this sweeping change

would entail far and wide ranging ramifications,especially for us; as it is unpredictable as to what form of Governments would take shape in these countries and and how pro or anti west posture would they adopt.

This very situation is exposing the anxiety attack on the Hawks, Neo-Cons and the Christian Dominant world view protagonists all around the world and especially those of the west. Nervous Hawks, such as John McCain and Joe Lieberman, (both disgruntled old hogs who do not know any thing else to survive but to cling on to senete sponsored; federal assistance programme) have started gushing fire of military intervention and No fly zone etc.

These forces, as a self-proclaimed and appointed undisputed leader / custodian of the world, have started contemplating steering this revolution in the direction of their choice to protect their interests in this most crucial and important region of the world. President Obama’s prudent caliberation in issueing policy statements is being criticized for not being bold enough, by these very forces– Neo-Cons, Hawks and CDWVPs.

Some of them are suggesting direct intervention under the guise of helping the protesters and also imposing the No flay Zone umbrella; which according to US generals is not practical as it would strictly be a military option. The most foolish example of their nervouness is the implication of Iran in this revolution, which Gen. Mullen has categorically trashed. Many of the opposing forces within NATO and outside NATO including the Arab League and Asian block have voiced against any foreign intervention including that of the United Nations.

In any event, any intervention carried out would, most definetly, be counter productive and inflame the already strong anti west feelings even further. This is the time for the west to redeem itself of the past misadventures by letting the masses of Mid East determine and carve out the way of their own destiny and choice, without the contamination of western commandeering. This will create room for the mutual co existence with respect for each other. It becomes even more astutely important in the backdrop of USA being on the decline and loosing its edge of world leadership role, whereas the Europe is financially and morally already bankrupt.

Those with the keen sense of observation, some goose bumps must have arisen lately, as the revolution seems to be showing some undercurrents of loosing its steem and may prove to be short lived; opposed to the overwhelming notion of sweeping the entire mid east and Africa. In Yemen President Saleh is holding on and Ghaddafi may outlive the uprising as he seems to be in no hurry to surrender and have some forces within and without the country supporting him in the larger interest of the dictatorial fraternity. Once again, we in the west need to be careful lest we have to bite the bullet.

It would be much more eventful in the history of mankind if this kind of revolt or uprising takes place in India, as it is already overdue– and that region, in my opinion, needs that kind of reshaping and overhauling—creating several smaller states to spur the progress and poverty alleviation of the millions of down trodden.

There is also a need of some sort of unification or federation between Afghanistan and Pakistan as this would harmonize the interests of the two counties and spread the opportunities to land locked Afghanistan by opening the route to neighboring newly independent states to the hot waters for trade and commerce. It would also create much needed Political and trade equilibrium in the region in the face of emerging China and declining US and economically bankrupt Europe.

This entry was posted on March 5, 2011 at 3:52 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Edit this entry.

LikeBe the first to like this post.Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Logged in as shakir2. Log out?


You may use these HTML tags and attributes:


You are the author of this post.

Notify me of site updates


Theme: Kubrick. Blog at
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

My Account

New QuickPress Post Edit My Profile Read Freshly Pressed Read Posts I Like Read My Subscriptions Manage My Subscriptions Track My Comments Global Dashboard Get Support Log Out My Blog

Dashboard New Post Site Stats Manage Comments Read Blog Register a New Blog Blog Info

Random Post Get Shortlink Report as spam Report as mature [x] Subscribe

Unsubscribe from Blog Like Edit
This SiteAll Sites

%d bloggers like this: