AAR - 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
NC Spring PATCON 2014 Pictures
2013 Fall NC PATCON Pictures
Friday, November 25, 2011
The following guest-essay was sent in by Brigadier Chitranjan Sawant, a retired general in the Indian army.
“Islam means Peace”. However, in its 14-century long history it has rarely promoted peace. Violence in all its forms has been its hallmark The turbulent times that its founder, the Prophet Mohammed, peace be on him, saw and experienced convinced promoters of new religion that violence was the panacea for all worldly ills. The Prophet was himself banished from his place of birth and work, Mecca, to find refuge in Medina. It was only through an armed struggle that he regained Mecca. Thereafter it was the sword of Islam which spread the new faith to many continents. The faithful followers indeed reaped what they sowed.
The Prophet Mohammed breathed his last in 631 AD. The war of succession followed. The great divide then took place, followed by violence and war of great magnitude. The Shi’ite and the Sunni sects parted ways forever. The Sunnis almost imposed their will on Shi’ites regarding succession through violence and slaughter. The Shi’ites have been mourning their losses ever since.
Violence as a creed to give effect to political plans grew firm roots in Islam. Perhaps the terrorists of today have inherited this philosophy of life, along with a conviction that ends can be achieved by terrorising opponents. A terrorist snatches away from the terrorised individuals the most precious right, namely, the right to life. Obviously a civilised society cannot afford to find excuses to condone an act of terror, be it in the name of religion, faith or anything else.
Islam, as it is interpreted and practised in Madrassas, the archaic schools of religious teachings, breeds hatred for non-believers who are contemptuously called Kaffir. The maulvis and imams, in their post-prayer Friday prayer sermons, preach violence and contempt for those who do not believe in Islam. There may be exceptions, but these are few and far between. Those who do not believe in Islam are terrorised to embrace it. As a result, terror is promoted as a part of belief in Islam in Madrassas and mosques. Moderate elements in Islam turn Nelson’s eye to the spread of what Tony Blair termed a “perverted form of Islam”. Terror is the tactic to subjugate those men and women who do not toe the line of the promoters of the belief that the world revolves around Muslims, and that others have no right to live in it.
The archaic laws applied by Muslim countries are far removed from modern jurisprudence. The teachings by archaic schools of Islamic thought adopt the psychological methods of brainwashing, and convert young recruits ready to die for all the wrong reasons. The term fidayeen is an offshoot of an archaic and misplaced belief that an Islamic terrorist who kills others and is in turn killed goes to Heaven. Terror takes root in minds of men who discover this shortcut to Heaven.
It is relevant to add that the concept of Heaven in Islam is a place where a ghazi or a martyr receives in abundance all that is forbidden in this mortal world. Wine and women find a place of prominence among comforts offered to a martyr in an Islamic heaven.
Where do we go from here?
All sane persons should encourage moderate elements in Islam not only to oppose archaic thoughts by word of mouth, but by action. Ideas have to be combated with ideas. The obscurantist preachers in mosques should be singled out and put through reformatory schools. Modern jurisprudence and progressive laws of the land, both civil and criminal, should be compulsorily applied to Muslims, too.
China has done so with success. In China Muslim males are not permitted to take four living wives at a time. The principle followed in China is Nan nyu ping deng, that is, equality between men and women. In Islam women are not allowed to have four living husbands at any given time, likewise men should not be permitted to have four living wives at a given time. It is worth emulating. It should be strictly enforced all over the world. It will make Muslims realise that they cannot be beneficiaries of an archaic system prevalent in medieval times in a Middle Eastern society. This will in turn promote modern social thinking and wean away the misguided youth from maulvis. The youth will indeed learn to merge with the mainstream of social life.
The Islamic terrorism of today is a global problem. It has to be tackled globally by men and women of all creeds and castes, region and religion. No one, neither individual or nation, should look for excuses to condone terrorism. Ideas have to be fought with ideas, and the likewise terror committed by a sect or a religious group has to be fought with all might at the command of a country or a group of countries. The rule of law is fine, but it should be borne in mind that Islamic terrorism has to be eliminated at all costs. One should not hesitate in putting into practice the primitive law “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” This was put to practical use by the Police in the Punjab, India against Sikh terrorists and separatists and by the British army in Malaysia to put down terrorism ruthlessly. Of course, new laws may have to be enacted banning preaching of religious terrorism in mosques and the eulogising of slain terrorists or honoring them as martyrs. Active support of moderate Muslims should be forthcoming in rooting out Islamic terrorism.
Muslim women, if and when liberated from the clutches of obscurantist males, will have a major role to play. They are oppressed souls now. Many Muslim priests are opposed to allowing women inside mosques to say prayers. Women have no role in decision-making. The system of Triple Talaq gives Muslim males right to divorce their wives at will by just pronouncing “talaq talaq talaq” These triple pronouncements spell doom for the marital life of a Muslim female.
When Muslim women are liberated, they will have a sobering influence on society and discourage irresponsible thought and action by their loved ones. A fine example of liberated Muslim women playing a responsible role in a society is that of Turkey. With the result that the government, especially the armed forces, ensures that Turkey does not revert to an archaic form of Islam. The modernisation of Islamic society by Kemal Ataturk showed them the path to prosperity and peace of mind. It is for others to follow suit and help curb terror through liberalisation of Islamic concepts. A country which does not wish to liberalise its archaic dogmas will only be promoting concepts conducive to terrorism.
Besides Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and even the much-maligned Iraq gave varying degrees of freedom to their women. Maybe Muslim women will come forward and raise the flag of liberation, liberation from bigotry and fanaticism, so that their children and children’s children live in peace and prosperity along with their brothers and sisters of other faiths all over the world. All will walk on the path of righteousness and eliminate the very concept of terror.
Women form half of the human society. The Chinese say “Pan tian” , that is, they are half of the universe. If our women join the war on terrorism, no Osama will dare promote it in any part of the world. The 9/11 in New York, the 7/7 in London and that dastardly terrorist attack on the Hindu temple of Ayodhya will indeed become history. We will await that glorious sunrise.
Let all sections of society move together for improving the quality of life in the civil society, irrespective of personal beliefs of a section. As the Vedas, the most ancient book in Man’s library, say: “Sangacchdhwam samvadadhwam samvo manasi jantam”, that is, “Let us walk together, let us talk together.” Let us shape our thoughts together for the good of one and all. Let all sections of a civil society know that we must swim or sink together. This change of mind and heart will sound the death knell of terrorism.
Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They Define as Being Right Outside Your Window
While nearly all Americans head to family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, the Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.
Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians without charge or trial.
The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.
The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.
Occupy protesters these days are fond of chanting “This is what democracy looks like!” — a slogan they borrowed from other far-left protests in recent decades.
But at Occupy Los Angeles, fellow photojournalist Ringo captured what democracy really looks like in the OWS milieu. Yeah, Occupations have their “General Assemblies” and their up-twinkles and so forth, but that only works when everyone is already in essential agreement after the real dissenters have already been expelled, leaving the “democratic assembly” to at most bicker over minor details.
But what happens when there is deep fundamental disagreement on some point — in this case the key point of who is allowed permission to speak in the first place? Do the Occupiers have their own version of the First Amendment, or perhaps something even better?
In a word: No.
The deeply disturbing underbelly of Occupy groupthink was captured by Ringo a couple weeks ago at the Occupy LA encampment when two disgruntled protesters wanted to have their say on the camp’s “open mike” stage which is supposedly free for anyone to use. According to the Occupy philosophy, this system is even better than the First Amendment, because with an open mike, every single person has an equal voice (not just those who control the broadcast media).
Except what happens when one of your own starts saying things that the other Occupiers don’t want to hear?
Below you will find a series of videos taken from Ringo’s report Infighting, Pot Smoke & Chemtrails – One Hundred Minutes at Occupy L.A. (In this post we’ll be focusing on the “infighting” part; read Ringo’s full report for more on the Chemtrails lunacy and open drug use.)
Captions (in quotation marks) are by Ringo, with a few clarifications by me:
“No sooner did I turn away from this scene before I heard another argument breaking out – this one was on the stage, and much of it was being amplified across the park.
“Seems a man who wanted to make a short speech walked up on the empty stage with his own portable P.A. system, but as soon as he began to speak he was quickly surrounded by fellow occupiers who were intent on preventing him. They repeatedly unplugged his microphone. In the picture below you can see the man who wanted to speak in the brown sweater being faced off by a very angry Aztlan-warrior-hippie in a yellow shirt.
“Here is video of how it looked as I approached”:
This is the essence of what the future would look like in an Occupied nation, boiled down into a two-minute video: When there are no laws and/or no one to enforce those laws, then the bullies will control society.
“A guy in a striped tank-top and flat cap came over to cool things down. He kept saying, ‘Listen to me, I’m from San Francisco, I know how this works, I’m from San Francisco, listen to me.’ …Nobody seemed to care that he was from San Francisco. The shouting and shoving continued.
“Evidently a moment of silence had been scheduled for noon – just about the exact moment the ruckus began. The ‘moment of silence’ was to be followed by a one hour yoga session on the main stage, accompanied by Indian chanting – the purpose of which was to exorcise the bad energy and heal the rifts between the various factions. As the yogis took the stage, the imbroglio continued. As you can hear in the next video, the man who was being prevented from speaking starts calling for the police to help him…but there were no police around”:
As you watch the video above, keep in mind that if the Occupiers actually took over the country, this is how our nation’s new parliament or congress would act.
“What I gathered from talking to a few people who were standing nearby is that libertarians, and others, including some of the anarchists and hippies and conspiracy theorists, were angry that the use of the main stage was being controlled by Communists and Left-wing radicals. They claimed that opposing viewpoints were not allowed. One guy with a black bandana tied around his neck told me that ‘organized groups’ were trying to take over OLA. He said this movement should be leaderless. Another girl who looked to me like a hippie, countered that ‘somebody has to be in charge.’
“Meanwhile, as flaring tempers and shouting continued on one side of the stage, a woman sat down on the other side with a Hare Krishna-style pump organ and began chanting over the public address system – the system controlled by the ‘Commies and Leftists.’ This all made for a very surreal scene”:
Muslim Brotherhood: Scum of The Earth
Muslim Brotherhood rally in Cairo's most prominent mosque Friday turned into a venomous anti-Israel protest, with attendants vowing to "one day kill all Jews."The Angry Arab writes:
The Muslims Brotherhood are the scoundrels of political: they are always seeking refuge in the last refuge of Middle East scoundrels. They are embarrassed by their political cowardice vis-a-vis the Military Council so they suddenly remember Jerusalem and the Aqsa mosque (when the contributions of the Muslim Brotherhood in all its branches over the years have amounted to...nothing, literally, unless you count their services to pro-Israeli Arab regimes). They suddenly decide to dedicate a march in Tahriri to Al-Aqsa Mosque. Those demagogues want to divert attention from the radical agenda of Egyptian revolutionaries. But Palestinians were on alert: they formed groups on Facebook and sent letters asking the Brotherhood to not do what Arab regimes do: exploit Palestine for cheap political ends.==========
Liberalism is about feeling, not thinking. The emotional sentiments of the Occupy Wall Street movement are crystal clear, even if the ideology used to justify them are an incoherent jumble of left-wing lunacy. For example, the anti-Semitism that has been on open display usually isn’t much more ambiguous than “Go back to the oven,” a popular chant at rallies organized by Occupy Miami’s Mohammad Malik.
The recent executive director of the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations’ South Florida chapter is a founder and spokesman of Occupy Miami, WND has learned.
Mohammad Malik currently is as an activist with several other Islamic groups.
He has led hate-filled anti-Israel protests in which participants were filmed wearing Hamas paraphernalia while chanting “Nuke Israel” and “Go back to the oven” — a reference to Jews being killed in the Holocaust.
Malik has been widely quoted in the Florida news media in recent weeks speaking for Occupy Miami.
The Miami Herald identified Malik as one of the organizers of Occupy’s Miami’s downtown campsite headquarters.
If the OWS movement doesn’t cure Jews of voting for leftists, nothing will.
Mohammad Malik rallies a mob against Jews.