Let's buy off the Taliban!

I've got two words for Fareed Zakaria with regard to Afghanistan:

Parking lot.

Yeah, like THAT'S going to work! (rolleyes)

And maybe, if we are SUPER nice to them they might stop trying to destroy democracies, enslave women, attack non-muslims, brutalize and bully anyone and everyone . . .

or not.

Yeah you can wear pants, but you cant get a job at the Woodland Hills, Ok. Abercrombie & Fitch if you wear a hijab. Apparently, orthodox Muslims, don't have the Abercrombie "Look"

Who would have thought that the dull-eyed empty heads at Abercrombie, who brought us soft porn billboards and sullen clerks, would end up having more backbone and sense than average Starbucks Loathsome Latte Lapper that infests our legal and governmental system. Our only hope is that this happened in Ok.

read it all here
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090918_11_A11_Apopul517991

Yes, let's abandon nation building since our own nation has been laid to waste by Federal and State governments. This should work perfectly on Pakistan. Great Britain has proven itself as the 'Gold Standard' for having fixed all of Afghanistan's problems. Let us follow her example of success so we can be ruled under islamic laws with riots eschewing threats of death promising annihilation by muslims. Then arrest non-muslim citizens for inciting persecution and causing 'hurt feelings' that must be apologized for or else!

Let's make a deal with, then start talking to, the taliban. We should hold hands and sing protest songs from the '60's (if we can remember them all through the fog of pot and LSD). We'll start with "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing... and finish up with "The Eve of Destruction".

It's time for Newsweek to get real about itself...

... it will be ruled by leaders who keep the country inhospitable to Al Qaeda and terrorist groups like it. That's my definition of success.

And that's my definition of nonsense. But I see that Fareed attended Yale and Harvard, so his stupidity is to be forgiven. Those two schools are at the pinnacle of the stupefication industry, along with Oxford and a few other prestige diploma mills.

*** Tabari 1:267 ***

So long as Fareed's defining success, maybe he would be so good as to point out a successful Moslem country now or at any time in the past. The closest would be Arabia, with its petrodollar-fed throngs of welfare mooches. India is primarily a Hindu country, held back by the problems associated with its big Moslem minority. Ans how about those Persians?

But what do the Arabians do when their Big 3 giant oil pools finally run dry?

I don't think they want money. They want Sharia.

Yes, I just picked up the infamous "The Case for Killing Granny" issue of Newsweek yesterday, and was going to send this in.

In addition to Fareed Zakaria's helpful suggestion that we "buy off" perhaps the most vicious entity of recent times--the Taliban--other articles in the same issue include "Shopping for a New Policy on Iran", which compares alarm over progress by Iran on nuclear armament to a suggestion that Saddam Hussein had WMD--which everyone knows was a "Bush lie".

And who is responsible for this egregious calumny? As Tarik Rauf of the IAEA says, "'the hype is likely originating from certain (known) sources.' The message does not specify the sources, but U.S. and European officials have previously accused Israel of exaggerating Iran's nuclear progress." In other words, the only people who really claim to be alarmed by Iran are those lying, war-mongering Jews. sarc/off

Another lovely feature is "Courting Islamic Cash in France". "French politics might live uneasily with Islam--battling over burkas, sparring over veils--but French economists are keen to make Islamic finance a crisis buster in Paris".

Note the alliteration, which serves to trivialize the "battle over burkas"--or any other possible French concern over Islam.

The article goes on to claim--ludicrously--that the global economic meltdown likely could have been averted if we all embraced Islamic finance. Of course, there is no mention of the financial sleight-of-hand involved in "Islamic finance"--nor, more disturbingly, is there any mention of the use of such "finance" to launder money for Islamic terrorism, nor how "Shari'ah-compliant finance" serves as a foot in the door for the more vicious and bloody forms of Shari'ah.

Here's the penultimate passage, which is quite chilling: "To create a market in France, [Finance Minister Christine] Legarde is working to smooth out the remaining tax and legal obstacles to full Sharia-friendliness."

For a long time, I considered Newsweek to be a thoroughly mainstream news magazine, rather superficial, but no more so than others of its sort. More and more, though, under Zakaria's hand, it is becoming--unbelievably--an actual part of the stealth Jihad.

IMHO, I am proud to live in a country where we can produce intellectuals with such a paucity of real world awareness.

Intelligentsia can peaceably contemplate their navels only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf – with apologies to Orwell.

No deal with terrorists. Fareed Zakaria is an idiot. You can't talk to killers like the Taliban. No way, José. We can only get rid of them by entirely defeating them, that's the only way.

More from the Empty Headed and Out of Touch Life of La Dolce Vida.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/17/AR2009091703679_pf.html

It seems that Michelle Obama has found her cause. Every First Lady must have a cause. Her cause is Organic Produce.

Never mind that her first attempt at organic gardening in $500 shoes would be foiled by the Clinton's, under whose watch sewage sludge had been spread in the very location that Michelle happened to plant her garden. So much for that bunch of Tuscan Kale and Bok Choy that ended up in the trash.

The above link shows what happens when Michelle goes to the local farmers market and pays up the nose for organic baby produce and the huge carbon footprint and public inconvenience that results. Gives one a real sense of the empty headed me-first mind set of this woman.

Ala, in the face of starvation and revolution Marie Antoinette said, "Let them eat cake", Michelle Obama in the face of financial collapse and widespread protest/revolt against administration policy, says "Let's go Shopping!" for $20 a pound baby potatoes and says, "Let Them Eat Arugula!"

Buy our enemies??

Usually, 'Crush' would be the verb to use...

Buying off our enemies implies handing them over lots of money earned by hardworking taxpayers. That's not good. Money ought to buy us something useful, not our enemies.

But then, the Fed moneyprinting gives me an idea. How about we provide them with a completely new currency, not usable outside Afghanistan/Pakistan? Then they can use that Monopoly money to buy off each others loyalty, while we save the real money for use at home. We actually do need it, you know...

But then, how about we sell our enemy instead? Get rid of our enemy and turn a profit at the same time.

First off, don't call Fareed Zakaria a fool. It would be a dangerous mistake to think of the likes of Zakaria as fools. They are highly skilled practitioners of taqiyya (like our very own MJ Akbar). They insinuate themselves in a liberal, secular society claiming to be loyal to it's constitution and it's values no less than it's mainstream that developed the constitution and values. And then keep pushing for "concessions" to most virulent Islamists under the guise of suggesting "sensible" strategies.

They are the most dangerous of jihadi Islamists. Beware of them and don't dismiss them lightly.

Secondly, one can pick up with a little effort, where exactly they are insinuating falsehood. We should do so in every instance and publish them widely. Here are the ones I picked out in Zakaria's article:

1. "...This gap is best closed not by sending in tens of thousands more troops but rather by understanding the limits of what we can reasonably achieve in Afghanistan....."

How did he know what the limits of achievement are ? There is no way one can understand these "limits". The correct, honest and honorable statement would be: America took a responsibility when it went into Afghanistan and it must fulfil that responsibility whatever it takes.

2. "...The most important reality of the post-9/11 world has been the lack of any major follow-up attack..."

Where does he place Mumbai attack ? Was it done by people completely different from Taliban ? Are there no common bonds, not just of ideology but of organization, between those carried out terror attacks in US and in India. Is there no connection between Hafiz Saeed and Taliban ? Is Zakaria absolutely sure there is none ?

3. "..But if the goal is to give Afghanistan a strong, functioning central government and a viable economy, the task will require decades, not years. .."

And therefore America should not attempt to achieve this goal ? Why ? Why should America not remain there for decades and complete this task ? What logic says that if something is not doable within months, it should be abandoned ?

4. "..But, as one American official said to me, "Waiting to negotiate till you are in a position of strength is a bit like waiting to sell your stocks till the market peaks. It sounds good, but you will never know when the time is right."..."

And mind you, Zakaria says this with respect to Mullah Omar, who according to Zakaria in the previous line, shows no sign of wanting to negotiate !! So how do you negotiate with someone who has no desire to negotiate with you ? Make him the most outrageous concessions ? Did Zakaria apply his mind to what US will offer to Mullah to entice him to negotiate ? Since it is such a critical piece of Zakaria's strategy, why doesn't he share his thoughts on this with all of us.

5. "..We have no alternative. .."

How ? You only said the alternative is to work there for decades. If I were American, I would want my government to stay there for decades if required and leave only after completing the job !

Sorry it became a long comment because I see similar "comment"ing in India all the time and feel rather strongly about it. And thanks to anyone who read it through !

Fareed Zakaria, he of the unsettling visage and grimace, offering a visible-skull-beneath-the-skin (amazing that he dares to appear on TV), self-assuredly and just a bit too quickly tells readers that "withdrawal [from Afghanistan] is not a serious option." This is asserted, not proven, and there are those who think it perfectly plausible and realistic to withdraw from Afghanistan and then, instead of placating the Pashtuns -- to whom Zakaria comically applies the fashionable language of contemporary America, telling us that they, those constant warriors, "do not feel empowered." "Do not feel empowered"? Jesus, what's next -- worrying about these bloodthirsty primitives, who were so well described by Churchill in "A Roving Commission" (and their delight in receiving bolt-action rifles, the better to fire on their neighbors at will, from the comfort of their own mud huts), and their "self-esteem"?

Yes, one can imagine Fareed Zakaria telling us we muset now worry about the "self-esteem" of the Pashtuns and other Muslims. By discussing the failures of Islam openly, don't we harm the "self-esteem" of Muslims? And isn't it important not to damage that self-esteem? You can see where this all leads -- to a complete silencing of the propaganda war that should be waged by the world's Infidels, in order to demoralize, and weaken the certainty that underlies the fervor, of many Muslims. If they can be made to understand that we Infidels consider that their states and societies exhiibt every kind of failure -- political, economic, social, intellectual, and moral -- and furthermore, that we find the sources for those various failures in Islam itself, this would help to demoralize not all, but at least some, in the Camp of Islam, for they would have to recognize the justice of that conclusion.

The fareed-zakarias of this world will, I fully expect, be denouncing this as a dangerous wounding of the amour-propre of those whose steadiness depends on their acceptance of the belief that they are "the best of peoples" and Islam the most wonderful of faiths. We can undercut that in a thousand ways, and should.

As to Zakaria's plumping for the Pashtuns, the most fervent supporters of the Taliban, apparently he is impressed with the fact that they constitute the largest ethnic grouping, not that they are more likely to work with Infidels. We already know that the northerners, the Uzbeks and Tadzhiks, were ready to fight, and did fight, the Taliban. Why should this be overlooked? And judging by their support for the Taliban, the Pashtuns are more inclinted to take their Islam straight up, and not on the rocks.

Newsweak. Declining Intelligence= declining circulation.

Why is it that every solution leftards in the Media can ever make is giving someone, someone elses' money?

There once was a time when Newsweak served a Noble purpose, but then my Septic system revolted.

makes me think of the old phrase "What's the worse thing that could happen?"

Makes me think of the phrase "What could possibly go wrong".

(If the other post went through: sorry disregard. I remembered the phrase wrong.)

in order to continue spreading hatred...

Hello Michael. Can you explain the principle of "wala wal bara" / love and hatred for the sake of allah? Thanks in advance.

nabi ZK (pbum)

As I read Fareed Zakaria I heard merely a succession of veiled threats: 'pay the jizya, or else!' (the 'or els'e being 'the jihad raids from all sides will continue and will get worse').

'Withdrawal is not a serious option', sez he, very loudly, at the beginning of the article. Hmmm.

Seems to me that from this article by Zakaria we can see that there are two things he doesn't want happening, at all costs: 1. America withdrawing from Afghanistan 2. a cessation of the jizya to assorted Muslim warlords.

I think he senses, seeping up from the grassroots, a growing fedupness of ordinary americans and of other non-Muslims whose countries are currently bleeding men and money into the bottomless pit that is ungovernable, unsalvageable-while-sharia-addled jihad-wracked Afghanistan. and he's scared. So, first up, he shouts - 'Withdrawal is not a serious option!!'. Don't think about it. Whatever you do, don't think about it! You mustn't! Stay and pay! Pay and stay'.

So, ignoring his barked orders 'you can't do that! you mustn't do that!' America and the UK and Australia and others should withdraw.

But withdrawal alone won't do it. The jizya tap should be turned off too, turned off altogether: nothing more to Afghanistan or Pakistan or other Muslim lands [such as Egypt].

And as the non-Muslim soldiers withdraw from Afghanistan (taking with them *all* their sophisticated weaponry and other goodies) there should be a corresponding removal, that is, an enforced reciprocal withdrawal, of the Mohammedans (not only Afghan but of other descriptions) that have entrenched themselves in *our* lands and from among whom keep on popping up wannabe-mass-murderous jihad plotters, some of whom have succeeded (e.g. Madrid, London), but most of whom have, luckily, so far, failed (Glasgow) or been foiled.

All Afghan Muslims currently resident in UK, USA, Canada, Australia, wherever, should be sent back to their homeland. If our soldiers leave *their* lands, *their* footsoldiers must leave *ours*. And any boatloads or truckloads or trainloads of Mohammedan males of military age, from Afghanistan or from anywhere else, who turn up on Infidel coasts claiming to be 'Refugees!' 'Asylum seekers!', should be Returned To Sender. Such aggressive mobs of 'asylum seekers', congregating on Infidel soil, have already been causing terrible trouble in places such as Calais and Athens.

Fareed Zakaria of the flushing the koran porkie

"Fareed Zakaria is an idiot."

From a posting above.

Not. Fareed Zakaria is his fathers son, and his father was an Islamic scholar:

http://sheikyermami.com/2009/09/08/cnn-host-fareed-zakaria-claims-he-influenced-yale-to-drop-mohammed-cartoons/

http://sheikyermami.com/2009/05/24/you-can-always-rely-on-fareed-zakaria-to-pull-the-islamic-wool-over-your-eyes-and-ears/

http://sheikyermami.com/2009/03/01/radical-islam-bend-over-and-spread-em-i-promise-it-wont-hurt-a-bit-sez-fareed-zakaria/

The politics of appeasement have never succeeded, and never will succeed. Just ask Neville Chamberlain.