Arab Spring Will Trigger Ramabomb Explosions

-->

With the start of Ramabomb, the Free World should increase its security measures in light of Mohamadans’ habit of escalating their usual level of violence to higher frequencies with more deadly consequences. The jihadist bombing of a bus of Israeli tourists in Bulgaria last week foreshadows the renewed tradition of savagery during the month considered sacred on the Islamic calendar. While bracing themselves for the inevitable jihadist attacks, civilized people should also take stock of events since Ramabomb ended last year.

Outbreaks of jihadist insurgencies have led to the fall of a handful of oppressive though not explicitly theocratic regimes within the Islamic bloc. In Tunisia, Yemen, Egypt & Libya, autocratic governments have collapsed in the face of an Islamic tsunami. Future waves of this storm threaten to devastate Syria, Irak, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia and Algeria. 

The authoritarian yet not overtly Islamic regimes have given way to power grabs by Islamists. The most populous nation in the Middle East, Egypt, has succumbed to the Moslem Brotherhood. The appearance of a fully enshrouded wife of the newly elected president serves as a harbinger of further oppression of the perennial targets of Islamists: women and non-Mohamadans. Jihadis have ramped up attacks on churches and the Christians inside them since the collapse of Mubarak’s government.

The Free World has no reason to favor blindly the widespread discontent leading to toppling of governments throughout the Middle East. The unrest in Iran appeared on its face as opposition to the Islamic oligarchy. However, the demonstrators were not demanding freedom from the foreign ideology imposed on their ancestors by Arab armies centuries ago. The crowds did not storm and destroy mosks, madrassas or other edifices of Islam as Islamists did to symbols of Persian civilization and modernity in general erected during the Shah’s reign. They merely demanded the ouster of the current occupants in the seats of power.  Calls for a less brutal dictator in Iran do not equate to desire for liberty. 

If someone needs a concrete example of how a country can devolve to a full- fledged totalitarian state with Islam as its sole basis for power, a look at Iran over the course of the past 35 yrs is required. Iran, like Egypt, is a highly populated and predominantly Islamic nation. However, a significant presence of other ideologies has existed in these two places. Both were headed by an autocratic who was outwardly friendly toward the Free World. Sadly, in the cases of these two significant members of the Islamic bloc, the United States’ governmental policy turned against its erstwhile allies against Islamists in favor of rebels who soon displayed their Islamist loyalties. 

Some glimmers of hope have occurred despite rising tide of Islamization. The secession of South Sudan struck a blow for freedom against the cesspool of merciless jihadis ruling the northern portion of Sudan.  The National Forces Alliance, a political party seemingly non-Islamist, won a plurality of parliamentary seats. The NFA grabbed more than twice as many seats in elections this month than did the Moslem Brotherhood’s party and another Islamist group in the forefront of toppling Kadaffy’s regime. Moncef Marzouki, the newly elected president of Tunisia, has openly pushed for a secular republic without a constitution not based on Sharia. In Algeria, the National Liberation Front, a mostly non-Islamist party comprised of supporters of the military-run regime, secured nearly a majority of seats in parliamentary elections in May. 

Unfortunately, even apparent victories against the further encroachment of Islam seem tenuous or fleeting. The fragile South Sudanese government will not be able to hold off continued attacks by jihadis without significant aid, military and humanitarian, from the Free World. Also, the National Forces Alliance in Libya, despite the reputation as an alternative to Islamic parties, has stated its desire for Sharia to serve as the basis of the country’s laws. Marzouki’s hopes for a secular republic depend on the sizeable group of Tunisian Islamists’ refraining from seizing power then imposing a theocracy when future elections go against their wishes. Algerian elections have had weak turnouts so the results provide little legitimacy for the non-theocratic government among the populace. Throughout history, Islamists have not graciously accepted others’ refusal to submit to their totalitarian ideology and cede power to those rejecting Islamic supremacy. No one should remain under any delusions that any country within the Islamic bloc will transition smoothly or rapidly into a republic dedicated to economic and social freedoms. 

COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT JULY 2012

More Than Words Needed

This week, two media reports grabbed my attention. On Monday, Dennis Prager’s mentioning on his radio show of the bombing of a church in Khartoum reminded me of the ongoing jihad by the Sudanese Islamists against non-Mohamadans within their borders. This Islamic aggression also continues against those in the newly created refuge called South Sudan. As I searched for more details, I recalled other such efforts to eradicate any Christians in Irak, Pakistan, Egypt and other places within the Islamic bloc during the most recent years.


The previous day, 60 Minutes whitewashed the on-going jihad against Christians in the territories of Samaria and Judea. This farcical piece of video insinuated that Israeli security measures are causing the diminution of the Christian population in Nazareth, in Bethlehem and in other noteworthy towns. However, the reporter, Bob Simon, mentioned the increase in the Mohamadan population in those same locations. Either by cerebral failure or willful negligence, this report omitted any reference to the frequent vandalism and assaults committed by Mohamadans against Christian targets under the jurisdiction of the Philistine Authority, not areas controlled by the Israelis. Therefore, the possibility that Arab Christians are fleeing persecution by Islamists was never considered or investigated.

Christians have suffered as jihadis have swarmed to Irak and Afghanistan to fight against the armed forces of civilized countries. The toppling of autocratic but not strictly Islamic regimes in Tunisia, Irak and Egypt have created opportunities for Islamic factions to implement persecution of Christians along with other elements of Sharia. Instead of American and other coalition members stopping jihadis from attacking Christians and others resisting Sharia-creep, these forces stand by while supposedly friendly new governments oppress those minorities or least turn a blind eye toward the burning of churches, binges of rape of Christian girls and other atrocities committed by mobs of Mohamadans.
As little as the deployment of armed forces of the Free World have done to protect Christian minorities, their presence may be forestalling more ghastly fates. Once those military operations end, the jihadis will be able to steer all of their efforts toward the extermination of Christians. It seems that nothing will stop their mission to eradicate non-Mohamadans just as previous totalitarians did to the Jews within the Islamic bloc starting in the 1940s.

Far too often the responses of Christians consists of hand wringing and calls for prayer. Of what value are those to people being robbed, raped or murdered with survivors fleeing for their lives? Frankly, those are excuses for non-involvement to assuage the sense of guilt of those living comfortably in the Civilized World. They involve no risk nor demand any exertion. Islamic persecution requires a potent antidote for it eradication.
Granted, a small number of Christians such as Voice of the Martyrs, Barnaba’s Fund and Samaritan’s Purse have ventured into enemy territory to provide food, shelter and other sustenance to refugees. However, they reacted to victimization that should never have been allowed to occur. If Christians were not defenseless and passive in the face of armed and ruthless jihadis, the need for restorative aid would be diminished. Generosity to help rebuild churches and schools destroyed by jihadis is wasted if no measures to prevent future attacks are taken.

Those within the Free World may be tempted to rely on their governments to halt the oppression of Christians and others with the Islamic bloc. An example of this hope lies in the Truman Doctrine, which provided American aid to people resisting Marxist subjugation. Later, the Reagan Doctrine mandated assistance to those already under Marxist oppression seeking to topple their subjugators. The same level of commitment should be applied to combat another manifestation of totalitarianism. Unfortunately, very few politicians in the various governments of the Civilized World dare to criticize any aspect of Islam. For anyone in a high ranking position of power to call openly for the defeat of Islam then initiate significant measures to accomplish that goal seems improbable at best.

Therefore, I will risk the inevitable condemnation from Islamists, apologists for Islam and bystanders indifferent to the menace of Islamization. Sympathetic words and modest efforts to assist the victims of jihad must also include willingness to protect the victims from more attacks. This aid must include means for freedom-loving people to counteract the violence of jihadis. Stated bluntly, the Civilized World must fund those resisting Islamic encroachment and those wishing to liberate themselves from Islamic regimes, including military assistance. Islamists, just as adherents to other totalitarian ideologies, believe that they are entitled to impose their will on the rest of the world, by force if opponents resist. If those in opposition lack equipment, training and other essentials to strike back at jihadis, then totalitarians will obliterate liberty and those who value it as happened in Europe in the 1940s.

Will Christians across different nations join forces regardless of the foreign and domestic policies of their homelands? Can various denominations set aside theological disagreements in face of a common enemy? Are Christians willing to spend their money and risk their lives to counter the violent oppression committed by jihadis? Have the dervishes of political correctness browbeaten civilized people into accepting any resistance to Islamic persecution equates to racism? As those in the Free World dither and debate, the jihad slithers onward, crushing those favoring representative democracy, equality of all peoples and freedom in general while drawing a pall over the lands, which it has subjugated. Free World must unite and overcome Islam before Islamists drag all of humanity into the abyss of a new and more sinister Dark Age.


COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT APRIL 2012

Unfriendly Reminder about Islam

Islamists are engaging in their latest round of exposure of the true nature of their ideology. Despite the efforts of Islamic infiltrators and their useful idiots in the media and academia, jihadis have ratcheted up a new round of violence in accordance with the Koran and other Islamic texts. This outbreak of jihad spans the entire Islamic bloc.

In Iran, the theocrats in charge of that totalitarian cesspool are on the verge of executing Youcef Nadarkhani for renouncing Islam and converting to Christianity. Where are the criminal coddlers who protest outside American prisons whenever an inmate is about to face ultimate justice? Apparently, they only oppose the death penalty for murder. Hanging for apostasy from Islam does not seem to bother those hypocrites.

President Obama expressed sorrow over the burning of a Koran used as a conduit for communication among jihadis in detention. Why no equal level of outrage over the murders of four Americans by savages in Afghanistan in response to this trifling incident? Do Obama and his cult of personality feel that those deaths were warranted for simply burning a book? Why did the President not apologize for the incineration of Bibles by American personnel in Afghanistan in 2009? Does he think that torching Christian holy books is acceptable but not permissible treatment of Islamic scriptures? Perhaps Obama will bow down to Afghan leader Karzai in an act of contrition before their next meeting in the same manner in which he did in front of the Saudi king.

In Egypt, Islamists continue their campaign of church burnings, rapes, assaults and other violent crimes directed at the Coptic Christian minority. In response, President Obama sought an increase of foreign aid to Egypt to fund a government being infiltrated by Islamists. An ex-Mohamadan turned Christian, Maher el-Gohary, and his daughter Dina personally appealed to the President of the United States to protect their lives from threats by Islamists demanding their execution for apostasy. They received an indifferent response from Obama. Are their lives worth less than a Koran? Is Obama willing to ignore the extermination of Egyptian Christians in order to appease the Moslem Brotherhood and other Islamists?

What is necessary for the entire Free World to unite and confront the Islamic menace? Are daily images of victims brutalized by jihadis capable of piercing the blinders of indifference surrounding a sizeable portion of the population of the United States, Europe and elsewhere? One has to wonder how much more carnage must jihadis inflict and how much more insanity must Islamists spew before all free people mobilize against the Islamic onslaught.

COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT FEBRUARY 2012

Out Go the Dictators and in Come the Islamists

The fall of Kadaffy’s regime and his death marks the most recent end of a dictatorship within the Islamic bloc. Over the several decades since the end of Ottoman then European colonization of the Middle East and North Africa, such violent changes in governments have occurred on a regular basis. While one might hope that Kadaffy’s demise would lead to freedom and justice, onlookers must realize who is consolidating power in Libya now. The logo of the crescent moon and five-pointed star has been an omnipresent symbol among the rebels. That symbol indicates the antithesis of representative democracy and of equal rights for all people.

In Egypt, the autocracy of Hosni Mubarak came to an end earlier this year. Under this regime, Islamists such as the Mooslum Brotherhood could not participate in political campaigns. Thus, Islamists were unable to impose their totalitarian agenda on Egyptian society. The somewhat secular government of Mubarek merely discriminated against Christians by making construction of churches impossible for all intents and purposes. Since the tumult and the new government, Islamists have murdered and assaulted Christians along with vandalizing and destroying churches. Police and military personnel have permitted the jihadis’ crimes against Christians, including siding with the jihadis in committing atrocities then arresting Christians for defending themselves.

The fascist entity of Saddam Hussein never singled out Christians for persecution. Since the American and British-led coalition toppled the Baathists, Islamists have declared jihad on the three percent of the Iraki population, which Christians constitute. Rampant church bombings have driven a large portion of that minority into emigration.

Anyone searching for the model of what will become of post-dictatorial countries in the Middle East and North Africa needs to study Iran. This country under the non-Islamist absolute monarch called the Shah permitted women more freedom than any other within the Islamic bloc. Since the rise of the theocracy, rampant misogyny swept Iran. In a matter of weeks, women with successful careers and control over their lives ended up in suffocating outfits and confided to their homes.

An observer of politics among the nations subjugated by Islam should see more possible seizures of power by Islamists in Turkey. Its staunchly secular legal code has been eroded by the rising tide of Islamization. The current prime minster belongs to an openly Islamist political party. In fact, a wife of his insists on wearing a head-rag in public in defiance of Turkish law forbidding the centuries’ old display of women’s inferior status.

Syria also appears high on the list of imminent victims of Islamist takeover. Despite Bashir Assad’s continuation of his father’s legacy of virulent anti-Jewish policies, including funding jihadist murderers who attack Israel, the Islamists expect more. Nothing short of full implementation of sharia will satisfy Islamists who have organized protests in Damascus and elsewhere.

The nations of the Free World cannot force Mohamadans to renounce their totalitarianism. Additionally, the civilized countries of the world should not favor either side in conflicts between nominally Islamic dictators and blatant Islamists. As long as the supporters of those two factions are destroying each other, the rest of the world remains less of a target of jihad.

COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT OCTOBER 2011

Etiquette for Ramabomb

In response to Mohamadans and their useful idiots who stipulate that civilized people cater to the absurd dictates of a seventh century criminal during Ramabomb, I am reprising this list of demands.

-Remove your burkas, nikabs, and all other suffocatingly misogynistic clothing that Islamists demand that every woman wear. We object to women being forced to hide under oppressive outfits because some men erroneously think that they cannot control their libidos. If Mohamadans refuse to control their little minarets, then they need to be deported to the infernal regions where Islam reigns supreme. These shroud-like outfits particularly gall those of us in the Free World during the summer when they exacerbate your noxious body odors.

-Leave your absurd superstitions like fear of sitting toilets and dogs plus your phobias of pork and alcohol in the Islamic bloc when you enter the Free World. We do not like to be told what we are allowed to eat or drink based on others’ delusions.

-Cease quoting from the Koran or any other Islamic texts that encouraged those terrorists to commit mass murder and condones their actions. We know that your supposedly sacred scriptures are full of hateful oppression directed toward us. We resent the threats which your ilk spews in reciting these totalitarian texts.

-Dispense with any absurd and baseless conspiracies that anyone other than nineteen Arab Mohamadans committed these crimes. At least have the decency to admit that your totalitarian cult wants to kill us.

-Stop the plan to build the monument at Ground Zero to the Islamic terrorists who carried out the hijackings. The same sentiments are directed toward the construction of any more terrorist recruiting and training centers. Whether you label them as a "mosk, "madrassa, "community center" or any other moniker makes no difference. Such constructions will provoke a formidable backlash against those who wish to gloat over our losses.

I wish a peaceful August to all civilized people. To all Mohamadans, I hope for your complete failure in all your attempts at violence, better known as jihad, during Ramabomb.

COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT JULY 2011

Questions for Christophobic Media

The joy of several prominent media outlets in response to the mass murder in Oslo more than a week remains unmistakable. The New York Times proclaimed Anders Behring Breivik as a “Christian extremist”. CNN referred to him as a “Christian fundamentalist”. The Washington Post insinuated that he is a “Christian terrorist”. Even Islamists such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations have gleefully spouted such inanities in the promotion of their totalitarian agenda.
In response, I submit these questions to all the Christophobes among the media and those in the blogosphere.
1. What evidence do any of you possess that Breivik practiced Christianity such as membership in a church? How can you willfully ignore his reference to his oxymoronic term “Christian atheism” to describe himself? Why do you instinctively assign his motivations to his supposed Christianity but not to his atheism?
2. Can you cite any Christian scriptures, Biblical or otherwise, which explain his murderous spree? On what basis do you ascribe his crimes as fundamentally Christian considering that no words attributed to Christ condone murder?
3. Why are you so reluctant to label blatantly and fervently violent jihadis as adherents to and practitioners of Islam? Since Breivik’s rampage, two reminders of the peril of Islamic terrorism to the Free World have occurred. A jihadi, Abdulhakim Muhammad, who murdered Private William Andrew Long, a recruiter for the U.S. Army, in Memphis received a life sentence for his crime committed in June of 2009. Also, a Mohamadan soldier, Naser Abdo, abandoned his assignment in Kentucky and gather weapons for another jihadist slaughter at Fort Hood before being arrested this week. These stand out among numerous other episodes of attempted or actual episodes of Islamic terrorism in the United States.
4. Why do you erroneously deny that Islamic texts repeatedly sanction violence in furtherance of imposition and maintenance of Mohamadan hegemony? Why do you ignore blatant verses that do permit, even celebrate, violence against non-Mohamadans?
5. If Breivik was motivated by hatred of Islam, why were his targets decidedly non-Islamic? Why did he plant a bomb near the Prime Minister’s office and then go on a shooting spree at a Labor Party children’s day camp? Mosks and other obvious Islamic targets dominate the ghettos in eastern Oslo.
6. Why are none of you blaming his homicidal streak on anabolic steroids when you are willing to consider other criminals’ usage of alcohol, stimulants, Twinkies or other substances as the true motivating force behind their horrific deeds?

COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT JULY 2011

Post-mortem on Osama Bin Laden

Americans rightfully celebrated Osama Bin Laden’s demise. Now, they have returned to the routine of life under the continual threat of jihadist violence. This includes preparing for anticipated reprisals by Mohamadans seeking revenge for the death of their poster boy. Before closing this chapter of Islam’s war against the Free World, a bit of review and some plans for the future are needed.

Soon after seeing reports that American forces had killed Osama bin Laden, I initially questioned the whereabouts of his corpse. Eventually after scanning various channels for more than an hour, the journalists announced that his body had been dumped into the Arabian Sea. While awaiting confirmation, I began to formulate a suitable fate for the cadaver. Although the United States Navy has disposed of Bin Laden’s remains, I offer these suggestions, both as an exercise in retributive brainstorming and ideas for any other Islamists eradicated in the future.

The American government could have exploited his corpse as a prop for videos to dishearten jihadis. His carcass could have been shown with a beer in one hand and a pork chop in the other, sitting on a beach in a Speedo man-bikini, apparently gawking at sunbathing beauties. This would have included captions indicating that Obama had renounced Islam after realizing what a miserable existence that he had endured following the absurd dictates of a seventh century criminal from Arabia. This first proposal combines the film Weekend at Bernie’s with hedonistic Koranic portrayals of paradise spun by the fabricator of Islam.

The Navy Seals could have attached some underwater cameras to Bin Laden before they dumped his body. Arrangements for pay-per-viewing would have been established so people could have seen his remains. The segment of the population who enjoys so-called “reality shows” would have loved this type of broadcast. Perhaps those hungering for ultimate justice could have been satiated by watching aquatic life forms feasting on him. British Petroleum managed to submerge a camera to monitor its leaking oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico long before it found a solution to the problem. Why should the federal government not have generated some revenue from the former “Public Enemy Number One” considering all that he had cost us?

Another possibility of benefitting financially from Bin Laden’s departure for Hell involves selling the jihadi’s carcass. Uncle Sam would have placed his corpse up for public auction for museums to purchase with the proceeds going to paying for the costs of combating against his fellow jihadis. I prefer that alternative to raising taxes. His digestive tract would have been stuffed with scraps of rancid pork and his body dressed in an outfit made of dog fur after it had been embalmed.

Continuing in the vein of incorporating Bin Laden’s cadaver into efforts to raise revenue for the federal government, what if it were publicly displayed at Ground Zero? I envisage a spectacle similar to that inflicted on Benito Mussolini’s corpse after his execution. People would have paid a fee for five seconds with his body to spit upon, kick, punch or otherwise defile as long as they do not unsecure it from its moorings. I suspect that competitions would have occurred in which Americans wait in line for their opportunity to inflict humiliation then try to outperform those who have already had their chance. Repeat business would have resulted, thus, increasing the profits to pay down the debt from the anti-jihadist effort.

Perhaps a specific type of business would prefer to claim Bin Laden’s remains. A pork processing plant could have dumped his corpse in a pit which is used for disposal of swine excrement. That exhibit could have been turned into tourist attraction. The company could have made it the highlight of the tour of its facility. If breweries and candy-making operations can invite customers inside their plants for tours, why should a pork processor not follow the same model?

Osama Bin Laden’s body could have been buried somewhere in the United States with a public pay toilet installed on top of it. Not only would the tolls to use the toilet defray the costs of operating the facility, it could easily become a cash cow. Every civilized human being needs a toilet at some point. Why not use one that makes a statement against the savage whose ideology would have precluded the invention of an implementation of sanitation?

Finally, this operation has shattered any delusions of Pakistan’s importance in the struggle against jihadis. The Obama administration plus the American intelligence and armed forces conducted the operation to eliminate Bin Laden without involving or even informing Pakistan. Previous experiences have taught Americans that Islamists have infiltrated Pakistan’s military, intelligence services and law enforcement. With this in mind, all American aid to Pakistan should be halted immediately in order to stop funding this regime of double-talking backstabbers. Those who turned a blind eye to the presence of the most famous jihadi in the world for years inside a conspicuously high security compound in the vicinity of their capital should never receive another penny from the taxpayers of the United States.

COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT MAY 2011