When Barrack Hussein Obama got elected and became President of the USA in 2009, almost the first thing he did was opening a new chapter in our relations with the Muslim world. In his much touted Kairo speech, Mr Obama promised to be more obliging to Islam’s many political wants and needs.
It was, to coin a phrase, another peace-in-our-time moment and the Noble committee felt duly obliged to award Mr Obama the Noble Peace Prize for his initiative – and for being the first black American president of course, something all the “anti-racial” leftists got so excited about whenever someone would dare to point that one should rather judge a man or woman on merit, not on skin colour. Alas, this was an American president who was easily digestible for Our Friends in Europe too: smooth like a suppository and about as eager to please.
It had already become quite apparent during the last years of Mr Bush’s tenure that his war on terror was going nowhere. The public had lost interest in it, his allies were complaining about it, and sane people started questioning the wisdom of the whole damn thing. Because what was the point of nation building in Afghanistan – a country with more tribal identities than Brooklyn and more tribal feuds than Palermo? At least in Germany, the US could consolidate some superficial semblance of Freedom & Democracy after the last war by pouring billions of their taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars into the western half of the country – but Afghanistan? Even after lavishing vast amounts of cash on a shithole, it would still be a shithole, wouldn’t it?
When I was in Argentina, I was confronted with exuberant luxury right next to appalling misery. Then being much more social justice minded than was good for me and others, I once asked a friend why there was no effort being made to remedy the situation, like in Europe. Her response was pointing out that having volunteered for a year with a church in a villa miseria, she now understood that some problems cannot be fixed by throwing money at them, and that there was a poverty that went beyond a lack of funds. If you cannot carve out a niche for yourself for lack of the cognitive or motivational faculties, then no amount of cash will change your life, simple as that. Because life won’t change unless you change. That’s why there will always be poor people, she said.
So there was indeed a point in pulling out of Afghanistan, but what about Iraq? After four or five years of Western intervention, the country was a pile of garbage. In Bagdad, people kept staggering through their lives, a day at a time, but if this was the answer then what the heck had been the question? What was the long-term plan? And unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was at least a country that – in theory – could have made the amounts of time and money spent on it a worthwhile investment. Well, it is being tried now but the jury is still out on that.
Anyway, “progress” in the Middle East now depended on us pulling out of there. This was the first change in policy and it was as hopey-changey as they came in the Obama administration. Of course, nature abhors a vacuum and as soon as the last Allied soldiers had left the country, the place was absolutely swarming with agitators, infiltrators, facilitators and terrorists of Islamic State. That’s the Army of Allah in its umpteenth incarnation for those of you who don’t follow the news on the BBC.
All of this happened much under the radar while the Yanks and the Brits were still hanging about, the Yanks in “The Green Zone” in Bagdad, the Brits in a compound near Basra apparently. In the meantime, Islamic Terror Inc. was busy rebuilding itself and its operations, while we were distracted elsewhere. Oh look, a squirrel. Oh no, that’s the Arab Spring, dear.
Ever since David Lean shot “Lawrence of Arabia”, the visual minds of many modern men (and women) have been replete with the notion of something inherently noble in the Arab character, some notion of an almost regal and chivalrous humanity hidden underneath even the grossest acts of cruelty. Why this is, I have no idea. It is obviously projection, but why of all places Arabia had to become the dreamscape of a vile supremacy cult being equated with heroic manhood, I have no idea. But it surely says more about ourselves than the Arabs when we think about it. Because an external crisis should also be interpreted as the product of an internal one.
Now, this dreamy and surreal imagination of the noble savage was prevalent in most, if not all, the reporting that was being done on behalf of this soon to be named Arab rebellion. Mind, these uprisings had precedence and occurred regularly, almost in every generation, when hordes of young people had to find a place for themselves in a society where the spots next to the trough almost always had already been taken. This chronic generational dilemma became more acute due to a dramatic increase in population (Egypt’s has doubled in the last thirty years) and industrialisation: there was not enough labour around for all these people.
But apart from this, the Arab Spring was business as usual. Arab rebellions had only been suppressed more efficiently by despots of earlier times. Mr Mubarak was one of these despots, and as far as despots go, he did a pretty good job: oppressed his opposition, used lethal force against his enemies (extrajudicially too – when needs must, I suppose) and ruled the country’s mosques with an iron fist. Every Islamic congregation in Kairo was infiltrated by his secret state police. And because there’s nothing like supervising the supervisors, there were triple checks and balances on the spies too, to make sure that no imam spoke a word out of turn.
Many Egyptian Islamists couldn’t believe their luck coming e.g. to Germany and finding out that there was absolutely no spying being done on them at all, on behalf of what they could or would be saying in public, or in private for that matter. Islamic hate preachers literally found their paradise here because of the extent to which free-speech was made available to them – without them deserving much of such trust, as we’d soon find out.
But for the moment, the Arab Spring was airbrushed quite neatly into a diorama of a heroic struggle for civil liberties along the lines of the American Civil War. What the idiots editing this sort of fairy tale forgot (because they never came closer to Egypt than a mask from the 18th dynasty on display in a museum) was that Egypt wasn’t America, Tahrir Square wasn’t Pennsylvania State House and Freedom & Democracy meant rather different things to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Second Continental Congress.
The evidence for this consists of the results of the first “free and fair” (well, sort of) elections Egypt ever had in all the seven millennia of its existence: the Muslim Brotherhood won a whopping majority, while the few civil rights parties worthy of the name got just about three percent of the vote. And let’s bear in mind that about 20 % of Egyptians are Copts. Yes, that’s a Christian denomination. And no, these people aren’t evil oppressors who want to force Egypt under the yoke of imperial rule by satanic “ZioNazis”, dear Labour party.
The inconvenient truth of the Egyptian elections was patently explained away by Western mass media as “a reaction to the Muslim Brotherhood being proscribed under Mubarak”, thus framing the problem as a political struggle in purely Western terms that have almost no meaning in the Middle East, where the Arab Spring was meant and understood to be a holy war (aka jihad) for a “return” to a “purer”, “more authentic” form of Islamic ummah, or group identity.
And it doesn’t even begin to cover the ideological proximity and overlap between Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and Germany’s Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP). The fact that Hassan al-Bana was an indefatigable admirer of Adolf Hitler until the very end of the war was conveniently swept under the carpet by every left-of-centre mass media outlet – I wonder why!
But the Islamisation of Egypt – formally endorsed by the Obama administration and Our Friends in Europe – had to be stopped at the last instant unless the most populous Arab nation were to become a failed state. Backing the Muslim Brotherhood and experimenting with Egypt was a brazen bit of brinkmanship that could easily have resulted in an utter disaster on our hands right there and then – especially after the Islamists making funny noises and laying siege to the Israeli embassy in Kairo.
Still, the Arab rebellion of 2011/12 caught on. It went on to Tunisia, a relatively secular state with workable ties to its former colonial rulers, and apparently didn’t do as much damage there as it did in Egypt. The Arab Spring played out rather unfavourably in Libya though and it resulted in a large scale, almost geostrategic disaster in Syria. Now, I have no idea what was going on there and I won’t pretend I do. But the West does seem to have found itself backing the wrong guys, time and again. This problem must be seen against the background of a rising tide of Islamic State fighters in Syria and a despotic, yet secular, Syrian leader who was doing a pretty good job of bringing stability to the region and his country but fell out of favour in the West.
This is how we set the stage in our quest to lose the War on Terror. Our troops had withdrawn, and the resulting vacuum was soon being filled to the brim by Islamic Terror Inc. Libya and Syria lay in tatters, while the fighting in Syria was read hot, due to the country’s sharing the Euphrates and Tigris valley with the country formerly known as Iraq, now mostly in the hands of Islamic State. Oh, and Afghanistan, where it all had begun a decade earlier? Well, forget about it, still the same old shithole it will always be. And let’s also forget Yemen and the Horn of Africa, where pirates plundered shipping to fill the coffers of some Islamist outfits in Saudi-Arabia or Teheran, their deniable units.
The irony being that after decades of clamouring for “stability in the region”, Europe was now much more in need of stability than the Middle East could ever be. And then Mad Merkel poured gasoline onto the fire by promising everyone who could make the trip across the Med a house, a car and a lifetime on bennies. And of course, at least four wives.
You bet they came. Not only from Syria and Libya mind, and not only the truly needy cases. Not only persecuted Christians or political opponents of the old regimes. Those were usually the people to be thrown overboard to make room on the dinghies for all the aspiring rap stars and rocket scientists. All “refugees” of course, some “children” even. Not under international law, mind, but according to the innovative idea that everybody was a refugee, somewhere. You only needed to fall on hard times to qualify.
After 1,5 million “refugees” had marched across the Balkans and sunk Hungary’s capital Budapest knee-deep in human excrement, the German government du jour still carried on with the madness. Balloons fully inflated, placards at the ready, TV cameras running, the “welcoming culture” sprang into action. It was as if the million and a half destitute human beings from Bangladesh to Morocco, from Nigeria to Turkmenistan, coming all the long way to Germany were indeed people coming back from history: six million Jews returning from the extermination camps, alive! It was as if Germany had finally, ultimately done good for its crimes and made peace with itself – at least in their imagination. And that was all that mattered.
Of course, the purpose of the mess Mad Merkel created was much more mundane: now there would be enough work to provide for otherwise useless cohorts of social workers, language teachers and adult education experts all the way from leaving Uni to retirement age, at the public’s expense of course. And now there would be people at hand to do all the menial jobs that had to be done cheaply, or at minimal expense. The “refugees” wouldn’t get the vote, mind, as voting is tied to citizenship which is hard to attain for a first-generation immigrant. But, again, the bit that really mattered in 2015 was that Germany felt good about itself, albeit at the expense of others.
As it happened, the Islamic State now smuggled some of its activists through the lines of the great migration via the lands of milk and honey, and they were soon set off. The Bataclan went with a bang, after an hour of vile debauchery that would boggle the mind of most human beings – but not a lefty’s! They went on making excuses for their partners in crime while a truck of peace ploughed through the Christmas Market in Berlin, and they were still of the opinion that we only got what we deserved when people jumped from Westminster Bridge into the river Thames – for all our imperialist mingling, so there.
And this is how we’ve lost the War on Terror. Again, I’d like to emphasise that our current predicament is indeed at least partly of our own making. Lefties do have a point after all, you see, but it’s on a completely different level than where they’d expect it to be. War was and is being declared on us because we are perceived as weak. Our wives and daughters are insulted as whores, our institutions are known to be corrupt, our media looks like pornography and our democracy like a sick joke to our enemies. The irony being that I could almost agree with them, at least sometimes.
What the secular mind can’t fully comprehend is the notion of evil acting on its own terms, wholly independent of what we are or aren’t doing about it. That’s why our enemies’ actions are continuously framed by our treasonous media and our useless politicians as reactions to something we are supposedly doing. No matter what we are doing: it is always our fault. When the truth is: our enemies have made a conscious decision and are making a concise effort to portray us the way they do to rally up their troops against us, and to subjugate us – irrespective of what we do or don’t do. And what we say or don’t say matters little to them.
We didn’t make them do this. It’s just their way of doing things.
© Guardian Council 2018