Are not only hypocrites and evil sedition planning assholes of the highest degree, but they simply are not remotely anything truly resembling Muslim.
The very Sharia most of these guys claim to uphold actually calls for the execution by summary crucifixion of people carrying out these horrible crimes.
But enough of village idiot pseudo-Molvis in turbans that hide their real reality.
I wrote a several page post on a few topics here, but then decided to erase the whole thing, as prudence overcame me.
So I will simply suggest a few things, and invite you to consider a few things in greater depths, possibilities not conclusions.
I think that as we think things over, and watch the state of our country and world over the next few years, it will increasingly occur to us that few things are ever what they seem to be, on the surface. It’s not unlikely that 20 years from now, information may emerge about some matters in the world today that will make the few of us still around, and still paying attention, actually cry when we realize what our action, and our inaction, allowed to be brought forth.
No one realizes the threads they are spinning are going to be woven into a noose in the next room, and that at the end of the day it’s possible our own necks may fit into it.
This analogy must be thought through with some care.
I think that all of us sometimes have the impression that we are, all of us, simply pieces laid out on a chess board – a game far larger than any of us are comfortable imagining, played for stakes that most people are simply unable to imagine by their very constitution.
Through most of life our imaginations, and worldviews, are rather small and even when we try to broaden our horizons certain things escape us.
Contentions to consider:
-The ISI and RAW both, far from being stakeholders in the game, are actually just pieces themselves, more akin to Rooks. Unable to see off the board, though each side essentially does its job – being seeing to the geo-strategic imperatives of the nations they serve. In dialectical opposition both RAW’s and ISI’s operations actually fit into a larger logic.
– The CIA and FSB, possibly, and other similar agencies may have a larger view of the board than the ISI or RAW – but again are serving what they perceive to be the interests of their respective Nation States in a narrow sense, and are more like Bishops in the game, wider range of operation and a wider view of the field, as their movements suggest, but still operating in a certain set of dialectical constraints limiting the vision of larger ends.
– All agencies and institutions worldwide serve larger ends by the very operative logic dictated by their structure and history, the bigger picture is often harder to see when you are inside the box.
-Anyone may want to consider a small hint, just a bare hint not even covering details or depths, of what might be behind the scenes of some things. Just a suggestion, contemplate the phrase “strategy of tension’ very, very, carefully.
And then NOT jumping to conclusions, just explore various ideas that surface when considering the phrase, one after the other, and in your head check off what seems likely, what seems unlikely, what seems preposterous, what seems realistic. Dance with multiple scenarios and see how they fit all visible players at work here.
– The Taliban are not whom others claim them to be.
– Mullah Umar is not what others claim him to be. And it is quite likely that if anyone happened to guess what his real role was, they would simply dismiss the thought from their heads as too fantastic.
-The Left with its facile and simple (though not without a degree of truth) party line of “it’s about the oil” is wrong. So too with the lies of the Right’s party line (though again, with some echo of truth as well).It’s not about democracy or oil, or freedoms, or several other shibboliths, a more complex set of geostrategic set of equations are at play.
Consider multiple options and see if you can start to see an angle, consider the distinct possibility that both you and I have been had, and played for fools – but not by the usual suspects that we’d normally rise up and blame.
Open your mind to consider multiple scenarios, who benefits, on what level, on what degree, are tehir open actions commensurate with the payoff we see them benefiting from, if not then what is missing from the picture?
What is not being spoken of by either side, left or right?
What terms are missing from the discourse but leaving an imprint whose rough, and fuzzy, outline can be barely felt, but not fully perceived?
Questions to think over.