North Korea: Missile Tests and Regional Impacts
This just in my email box from "Strategic Forecasting, Inc."
By Rodger Baker

North Korea has done it again. A week after it tested seven missiles, including the long-range Taepodong-2, a resolution condemning its actions has stalled in the U.N. Security Council (UNSC), South Korea is criticizing Japan for hyping the launch, Japan is openly discussing changes to its constitutional military restrictions, and the United States is asking China to use its negotiating capabilities to bring some stability to the situation. If North Korea was largely marginalized leading into July, it is now once again the center of attention -- and controversy.

Defying repeated warnings from the United States, Japan, South Korea and even Russia and China, North Korea launched not one but seven missiles, early July 5 local time. Most were short- or medium-range Hwasong or Nodong missiles; the first launch was timed to coincide with the Independence Day launch of space shuttle Discovery in Florida. But it was the third missile, the long-range Taepodong-2 -- believed to be capable of striking Alaska or Hawaii -- that garnered the most attention.

Pyongyang accomplished quite a bit with the July 5 launches. First and foremost, it has shocked the world with multiple tests while managing to avoid a military confrontation with the United States. It has been able to gauge the effectiveness of improvements in its ballistic missile program -- particularly with the short- and medium-range models that pose a more significant threat to regional security than the Taepodong-2. And it has once again exposed and exploited rifts in Washington's Northeast Asian alliance structure.

Moreover, with disagreements stalling any actions against North Korea at the U.N. Security Council, it is China that appears poised to gain the most from Pyongyang's actions.

Taepodong Failure and U.S. Relief

North Korea had placed the Taepodong-2 on its launch platform more than a month prior to the test launch, as if posing it for U.S. spy satellites and reconnaissance aircraft. Several times, Japan or others announced that a launch was imminent, and each time there was a corresponding cry for restraint, and increasingly overt threats from the United States and Japan -- including calls to shoot the missile down in midflight or even strike it before it left the launchpad.

When the Taepodong-2 finally lifted off, at shortly after 5 a.m. local time, it produced more of a fizzle than a bang. The missile didn't fly over Japan. It didn't place a satellite into orbit. It didn't fulfill a bold, unofficial threat by Pyongyang and land off the coast of New York. In fact, it flew within parameters for just 40 seconds, before either breaking up or suffering engine troubles and veering off course. It landed in the waters between North Korea, Japan and Russia a few minutes later.

The failure was quickly labeled by international media, observers and U.S. officials as an embarrassment to the North Korean regime and a demonstration that Pyongyang lacks the wherewithal to pull off a successful test or to threaten the United States. The additional six missiles were written off as little more than upgraded, inaccurate, short-range SCUD missiles. The initial condescension towards North Korea's technical capabilities was coupled with condemnation of the tests and contradictory recommendations for follow-on actions.

But not all the details of the missile's flight path are clear. According to some reports, the missile performed normally for some 40-42 seconds, burned out and fell into the ocean. Other reports suggest a catastrophic failure, fragmentation of the rocket or a fire. Some estimates put the total flight time at around two minutes, while the South Koreans have said total flight time was seven minutes -- during which the missile traveled 499 kilometers from its launch facility.

Given the available information, it is very likely that the missile suffered system damage during the most critical and stressful part of the launch. This is certainly the picture the United States is projecting, and apparently with some relief. In the weeks leading up to the launch, Washington had touted the strengths of the U.S. missile defense system, moved tests forward on the calendar and warned that the option of shooting down the Taepodong-2 was clearly on the table. The failure of North Korea's missile, however, kept Washington from having to make the difficult decision of whether to carry through with that threat and shoot it down in flight.

There were real reservations about acting on those threats. First, while Washington has confidence in the missile defense system, that confidence is not 100 percent. If North Korea had fired its missile and a U.S. intercept failed, it would be the U.S. Defense Department and the Bush administration with pie on its face. More importantly, such a failure could undermine whatever psychological deterrent the missile defense system currently provides.

But perhaps even more troubling for Washington was the prospect that a strike against the North Korean missile would succeed. First, there is a question of where the intercept would take place -- and where the debris would fall. But the second question is how North Korea would respond. Pyongyang has one key consideration in its actions: ensuring regime survival. North Korea structures its defense force and projects a prickly personality in order to dissuade the United States or others from attacking. But Pyongyang knows that its capabilities are limited and that, in a war with the United States, it ultimately would lose.

Though it feels threatened by Washington, the North Korean leadership does not view launching an offensive war as a logical act. North Korea is outgunned and outclassed by the United States; launching an invasion of South Korea or an attack on Japan or the United States would be a surefire way to ensure regime change in Pyongyang. If Washington shot down its missile, however, the North Korean elite might view that as a guarantee of imminent U.S. military action -- and Pyongyang might strike out at its neighbors to inflict as much pain as possible, seeking to disrupt any U.S. invasion or attack plans.

But even barring such a reaction, allowing its missile to be shot out of the sky by the U.S. military would trigger significant stresses for North Korea -- both within the elite and from the broader military and society. The regime would question whether it could maintain cohesion and stability without retaliating. For Washington, then, either a failure or a success of the U.S. missile defense system could lead to open hostilities in Northeast Asia. The best thing Washington could have hoped for was that North Korea's missile would fail -- even before the button would have had to be pushed for the intercept.

And Pyongyang knew this as well.

A Scrubbed Launch?

There is some possibility that North Korea intentionally scrubbed the launch. On the one hand, simply putting the missile away after leaving it on the pad for more than a month would have been viewed as capitulation -- and that could have weakened the internal cohesion of the regime. A launch became necessary practically as soon as the missile was rolled out (unless Washington had given in to Pyongyang's calls for bilateral talks).

But on the other hand, while North Korea has always walked close to the line, it has been very careful not to cross it. A successful Taepodong-2 test could have shifted the strategic calculation of Japan or the United States toward North Korea. Tokyo already had warned that if any part of the Taepodong-2 fell on Japanese territory, it would be considered an act of war. And while Washington has been relatively lax toward North Korea, aside from rhetoric and the occasional economic lever, all bets would be off should North Korea demonstrate the ability to pose a concrete threat to the U.S. mainland.

For Pyongyang, a controlled launch failure presented a better outcome than risking an accident or simply putting away the long-range toy. A picture-perfect satellite launch would have been the best outcome, but it is questionable whether North Korea actually believed it would be able to pull one off. After all, few space programs have ever managed to develop new systems without many failures along the way.

Other Missiles and Regional Tensions

Whether Pyongyang failed to succeed or succeeded to fail, the Taepodong-2 was not the only missile launched that morning. There were many motives behind North Korea's additional launches. First, everyone was already expecting a Taepodong-2 launch; if Pyongyang had launched only that rocket, the psychological impact already would have been discounted. There would be little leverage. Second, if the North Koreans knew they would scrub the Taepodong-2 launch, they would want to demonstrate a variety of capabilities to cover for the failure.

Finally, and more significantly, North Korea is intending again to trade its missile launches for concessions from its neighbors and the United States. If a moratorium on missile tests is coming anyway, this launch represented a final chance to assess improvements to North Korea's missile systems, particularly as the country so rarely tests its ballistic missiles. Testing six short- and intermediate-range Hwasong and Nodong missiles -- the real bulk of North Korea's missile force -- would allow the country's military to learn more in a single day about their own capabilities and upgrades than they had in the entirety of the preceding decade.

It is these overlooked missiles that are the true face of North Korean missile technology. Pyongyang's Nodong missiles have the capability of reaching most of Japan, including U.S. bases in Okinawa. North Korea has more than 100 of these mobile missiles, making them an extremely valuable commodity. And its short-range Hwasong series can strike anywhere in South Korea and potentially parts of Japan.

The combination of short-, medium- and long-range missile tests helps to explain the political intent behind the July 5 launches. Dividing any coalition that forms against it has been a key aspect of North Korean foreign policy. The regime in Pyongyang has played skillfully on the differences in strategic thinking of trilateral allies Japan, South Korea and the United States. The current diplomatic spat between Tokyo and Seoul over the extent to which North Korea's missile tests should be dramatized is a key example of just how easily these rifts are exploited. The time and effort the United States is expending to convince the world that Washington and Seoul are on the same page is another.

Stalled at the Security Council

In the UNSC discussions, Russia is expected to abstain from any resolution to punish North Korea -- but China well might veto one, so Tokyo and Washington are delaying any vote on the issue. But though Moscow is not actively joining in attempts to have North Korea sanctioned, Russian authorities have found it difficult to conceal their frustration with Pyongyang. What is clear from initial statements, particularly about the safety of Russian ships and aircraft in the missile test zone, is that the North Koreans never bothered warning Russia before lobbing missiles off its coast.

Amid all of this, China appears to be the least fazed by the North Korean tests.

But China also may have had prior notice about the launches. Initial comments credited to U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill suggest that China was notified about the tests before they occurred. Officials in Beijing have countered that they were told of the launches a few hours before North Korea formally announced them -- but still days after they actually had taken place. Either way, the Chinese once again have found the world turning to them for a solution.

Given the Security Council deadlock, China is the only viable path to negotiations with North Korea. In fact, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Richard Bolton has said the Security Council vote was delayed so that diplomacy through China could continue. Washington and Seoul both have called for Beijing to talk to Pyongyang, and the Chinese already had conveniently arranged for a relatively high-level delegation to visit North Korea.

For China, the missile launches have reinforced Beijing's importance to the United States and even Japan. Neither Washington nor Tokyo is prepared to strike back at North Korea militarily -- over either the missile tests or the ongoing nuclear crisis. Both have opted for sanctions and attempts to isolate North Korea, but these paths require the assistance and participation of South Korea and China. And even if Seoul were fully on board, China would remain as North Korea's primary lifeline. China can undermine any U.S. efforts to isolate or punish Pyongyang -- or it can facilitate dialogue.

In the weeks leading up to the missile tests, Beijing had proposed various ways to restart the stalled six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program -- talks from which both Washington and Pyongyang had basically walked away. As the primary coordinator and host of the talks, Beijing has leverage with all the participants -- but China found few takers (aside from South Korea) for its recent proposals. All of that changed, however, when North Korea actually tested the missiles. Washington sent envoys to Beijing and held out the possibility of bilateral talks with Pyongyang (which North Korea has demanded in order to discuss economic sanctions and frozen assets) on the sidelines of the six-party discussions.

While it is not certain that China facilitated the North Korean missile tests, it does seem that Pyongyang was certain the tests wouldn't trigger China to turn on it. If Beijing were truly upset, it could make that rather clear to North Korea in very painful ways. It hasn't. Rather, the Chinese have called on all parties to return to dialogue -- dialogue facilitated by and benefiting China. Meanwhile, North Korea is sitting back and studying the deadlock at the U.N. Security Council, the cracks in the U.S.-South Korea-Japan alliance, and the fact that the world's attention has again turned back toward Pyongyang.

Conclusion

North Korea considered its 1998 Taepodong-1 launch a brilliant success. Only two years later, Pyongyang had gone from being an international outcast and sidelined nation to the center of diplomatic activity -- with normalized relations across Europe and with Canada and Australia. North Korean leader Kim Jong Il hosted then-South Korean President Kim Dae Jung in Pyongyang for the first ever inter-Korean summit in 2000. North Korea gained economic and diplomatic ties and began to break past the constraints of a relationship that had been based primarily on U.S. pressure and Chinese handouts.

Pyongyang sees the same sorts of benefits in its future this time around. It has grown expert at creating artificial crises, from which it reaps economic and political benefits in exchange for merely maintaining the status quo.

In recent years, Washington has attempted to simply ignore North Korea rather than giving in to its temper fits. After all, if a kid in a toy store holds his breath while demanding that a parent buy a new toy, doing so only encourages the behavior -- whereas waiting for the kid to pass out and then start breathing again puts the kibosh on the temper fits. Or at least, that is the theory.

But North Korea always has an extra ace up its sleeve: geography. If the issue were only between North Korea and the United States, Pyongyang would have been ignored into submission years ago. But while its Taepodong-2 failed, its regional missiles proved quite effective. And neither Seoul nor Tokyo can feel as confident as Washington that North Korea really won't do something too crazy if left to stew in its own isolation. When Washington turns a deaf ear, Pyongyang pokes Tokyo and Seoul -- and when they cry out, the United States is drawn back in.

And until a new option is found to be effective, it seems that Beijing is destined to benefit -- as the only voice that can soothe the savage North Korea.
Send questions or comments on this article to analysis@stratfor.com.







Distribution and Reprints
This report may be distributed or republished with attribution to Strategic Forecasting, Inc. at www.stratfor.com. For media requests, partnership opportunities, or commercial distribution or republication, please contact pr@stratfor.com.

Do you have a friend or acquaintance that would benefit from the consistent actionable intelligence of the FREE STRATFOR Weekly Geopolitical Intelligence Report?

Send them to www.stratfor.com/subscriptions/free-weekly-intelligence-reports.php to sign up and begin receiving the Stratfor Weekly every Tuesday for FREE
Technorati Tags:North Korea:South Korea:China:Russia:Japan:Taiwan

|

I Want To Cut Off The Head Of The Democratic Party And Drive a Stake Through It's Heart.

Though, truth be told that, as enticing as it seems is not my first choice.

What I would prefer is a Constitutional Amendment to Section 2 of the 14th Amendment

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,(See Note 15) and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

To read:

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of Citizens in each State. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,(See Note 15) and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

I find it beyond any possible expectations that the framers of the 14th Amendment ever considered that a Census of Citizens of Other Nations would determine the Balance of Power in the House of Representatives and sway the Count in the Electoral College to any extent, much less the degree it now does, some two dozen or so Seats and Electoral Votes.

I was very pleased to see at least ONE politician come forward on this issue as I wrote in a previous post. Burns: Illegal immigrants shouldn't be counted in Census in much greater detail.

In addition I find it very distasteful that Illegal Aliens are counted in the Census effecting the Political Alignment of Power, while the oldest Inhabitants of the Continent are to be ignored.

The Constitutional Amendment is what I would prefer

BUT if it should FAIL?

I very much want to see politicians justify such a position, whether it be holding the Bill up in Committee, or voting against it in the Committee of the Whole.

I want them to STAND UP AND BE COUNTED in the crudest betrayal of the Voters and Citizens of this Nation.


I want the result of such actions to be that the Electorate rises up in justified rage and,

Cuts OFF the Head of the Democratic Party and Drives a Stake Through It's HEART

Blogs that Trackback to this Post:
Illegal aliens entering from the North, too from Right Truth

What about illegal aliens and/or terrorists entering the United States through the Northern border? We don't need to put all our border patrol eggs into the Southern border basket. But just for a few minutes let's lighten up and have

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email the coalition and let me know at what level you would like to participate.

|

The Open Trackback Alliance XXVIII
For your listening pleasure while you browse

"Der er et yndigt land" (There Is A Lovely Land)

Words by: Adam Gottlob Oehlenschlager
Music by: Hans Ernst Kr?yer
Adopted: 1844

"Derer et yndigt land" was first performed for a large gathering of Danes in 1844, and became popular quickly with the Danish people. It was adopted later that year by the Danish government as a national anthem, but not the sole national anthem. This anthem is on equal status with "Kong Christian",which is both the national and royal anthem.

When the Danish anthem is usually performed or sung, the first verse is played in its entirety, then it is followed by the last four lines of the last verse. (This is true whether the lyrics are sung or not



Recentlty I have been posting music to Illustrate the Diversity of America, this week I have a different motive to express Solidarity with DENMARK

I maintain my Support of Denmark, and will later today, post links to and my thoughts about a Danish Editorial "We are being pissed upon by Per Nyholm "

I think I shall title my Post, "There is no "But" in "Freedom of Speech".




When I first started upon my journey through the blogverse I created a Statement of Purpose
Now upon reading it, one can realize that I did not hold to every detail of that original statement, but from it's basic premise, I have never swayed, in my belief that the Blogs are in fact the Committees of Correspondence of the Second American Revolution.

And that it is a Revolution of Information, no longer can we afford and allow elite gateways to control what we can see, hear and discuss.

For I believe that those bloggers who find their way, here and in particular from the Blogs associated with Sam.

HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.

Some of us are more Serious, some of us are more lighthearted and some post the common ordinary things that make one smile and recall that Life without the simple things to treasure is meaningless.

And it is important that all have a platform from which to speak.

As I understand this process you can link to this post and trackback to this post on ANY subject or post you think important. It is open. I will repeat this every Monday.

The Committees of Correspondence welcomes your intelligent comments. And also welcomes you to join the

OPEN TRACKBACK ALLIANCE

This week I also have shortened my usual introduction for a more inportant message.

In it's struggle for Freedom of Speech.

Sign the Petition NOW!

JEG opstille hos Danmark!

44162 Total Signatures 0:38 AM CST 22 May, 2006 We can do better pass the word~!

From Agora a call to Support the Manifesto online by signing another Petition, why not sign both?


MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism
Created by Mark Jefferson on March 1st, 2006 at 5:42 pm AST

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.
We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all. "

Blogs that Trackback to this Post:

On Monday
Ray Nagin and the Bush FEMA Snow Job from Planck's Constant

Y'al come back now, Y'heah? ;-)

|

What Makes Anyone Think It Was A Mistake?
One of the most common memes lately is how the first demonstrations in support of Illegal Aliens, and some aspects of the later ones were mistakes.

Immigration Activists To Snatch Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory
One constant in the immigration protests this year has been the ability of the activists to sabotage their own position. With the White House and the Senate poised to deliver most of their agenda, they overreacted to the House proposal and staged a number of demonstrations that proved so provocative that it undermined their allies in both places. Many of these protests specifically targeted George Bush, although he opposed the House bill and had worked for normalization for years.

My opinion of that reaction, is that those who hold it have not reflected upon the origins of these demonstrations.

What makes them think it was a mistake?

As I pointed out in Pinko De Mayo

All we have to do is look at the main organisation that organised these demonstrations

ANSWER
{ I used red fonts here because it is so appropriate}

AMSWER is a MARXIST organization, whatever gave anyone the idea that such a body cares about improving the life of individual people? The Hundred Plus Million slaughtered by Marxism over its reign? The shining example of the New York Times Star Reporter who covered up the HOLODOMOR Genocide in Ukraine under Stalin and who is reported to have said, when asked how he could justify his actions if not as a Human Being, then as a Journalist,

"The deaths of a few tens of millions of peasants are of no consequence, when weighed against the Future Victory of the Revolution"??

You think I exagerate??

Christopher Hitchens lays this out perfectly in

Anti-War, My Foot The phony peaceniks who protested in Washington

""International ANSWER," the group run by the "Worker's World" party and fronted by Ramsey Clark, which openly supports Kim Jong-il, Fidel Castro, Slobodan Milosevic, and the "resistance" in Afghanistan and Iraq, with Clark himself finding extra time to volunteer as attorney for the genocidaires in Rwanda. Quite a "wide range of progressive political objectives" indeed, if that's the sort of thing you like. However, a dip into any database could have furnished Janofsky with well-researched and well-written articles by David Corn and Marc Cooper—to mention only two radical left journalists— have exposed "International ANSWER" as a front for (depending on the day of the week) fascism, Stalinism, and jihadism.



The group self-lovingly calling itself "United for Peace and Justice" is by no means "narrow" in its "antiwar focus" but rather represents a very extended alliance between the Old and the New Left, some of it honorable and some of it redolent of the World Youth Congresses that used to bring credulous priests and fellow-traveling hacks together to discuss "peace" in East Berlin or Bucharest. Just to give you an example, from one who knows the sectarian makeup of the Left very well, I can tell you that the Worker's World Party—Ramsey Clark's core outfit—is the product of a split within the Trotskyist movement. These were the ones who felt that the Trotskyist majority, in 1956, was wrong to denounce the Russian invasion of Hungary.

One of the primary tenents of Marxism in the Past was

"The capitalists would begin to suffer from a falling rate of profit.

? The workers would therefore be ?immiserized?; they would become poorer as the capitalists struggled to keep their own heads above water.

? The poverty of the workers would drive them to overthrow the capitalist system ? their poverty, not their ideals.

The problem was Capitalism did not cooperate and the workers condition improved. OOPS.

So they altered the their definitions

A Polish born American economist and a Marxist, Baran is the author of The Political Economy of Growth (Monthly Review Press, 1957). In it, for the first time in Marxist literature, Baran propounded a causal connection between the prosperity of the advanced capitalist countries and the impoverishment of the Third World. It was no longer the case, as it was for Marx, that poverty ? as well as idiocy ? was the natural condition of man living in an agricultural mode of production. Rather, poverty had been introduced into the Third World by the capitalist system. The colonies no longer served the purpose of consuming overstocked inventories, but were now the positive victims of capitalism

America being the most successful o the Advanced Capitalist Countries, naturally gets to bear the total burden of blame,

No, I do not believe ANSWER made any mistake at all in how the demonstrations were presented to the American Public,

For them to have made a mistake, would imply their purpose was to improve the lot of those marching, instead of stirring up Class Conflict in pursuit of their own political goals.

What happened in France last Fall, does not suit their aims, they would prefer to see that level of Class Struggle and Revolution HERE

The Great Cox & Forkum illustrates and alternate version of this Duality of Purpose in

Meeting of Minds

"[T]he left's attempt to capture the pro-immigration side of the argument creates a false alternative, with both sides taking for granted the false premise that the effect of immigration is to destroy America and merely disagreeing on the desirability of this outcome."

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email the coalition and let me know at what level you would like to participate.

|

They Are So Crusader Armies
Yes we have heard so many times about the Crusader Armies the West (US) has sent to the Mideast.

Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders

No one argues today about three facts that are known to everyone; we will list them, in order to remind everyone:

First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.

If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.

Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.

So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.

Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.

All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al-Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said: "As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed [by the ulema]. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life."

Text of Fatwah Urging Jihad Against Americans

The Arabian Peninsula has never--since God made it flat, created its desert, and encircled it with seas--been stormed by any forces like the crusader armies now spreading in it like locusts, consuming its riches and destroying its plantations

When these claims are uttered there is usually sputtering, equivocation, and attempts to deny.

I am here to say that in my opinion, that is the truth.They Are So Crusader Armies.

But in the true historical sense of the Crusades, and not the bilge that is the common perception.

I believe it was Will Rogers, who once said, "It is not what folks don't know, that's the problem, it's what they do know that ain't so."

The Crusades are a case in point of misinformation and Historical Revisionism.

In a nutshell, for those who have never bothered for themselves to explore that era of History, let me relate, what I believe the perception is.

The Imperialistic, Aggressive, European Christians invaded the Peaceful Advanced Civilization of Islam, incurring the lasting wrath of Islam for which we as the linear descendent's, should feel shame and make amends.

Total HOGWASH.

Islam came out of the Arabian Peninsula and preceded an campaign of Conquest, Pillage and Plunder lasting over a thousand years.

First the conquered the MidEast and Northern Africa, which were Christian and Jewish as I recall? Also Persian, Zoroastrian, and Eastward to the Indian Subcontinent, which was Hindu. A point little thought of is that the alternate name for what is now Afghanistan is Hindu Kush, which translates into English as Hindu Slaughter, the last vestiges of the previous Culture were recently destroyed by the Taliban. That Culture was not the only one destroyed by the Peaceful advance of Islam, but we are here more concerned, with the effects on Europe.

After the MidEast, and Africa, the Muslim Empire crossed over into Spain, the Conquest of Spain and Portugal took some ten years.

The Muslim Armies then began the Conquest of France until turned back at theBattle of Tours by Charles Martel. To give an idea of the extent of their advances let's look at a map of France.

As you can see that was not a minor incursion.

Over the next four hundred years, the Muslim Armies ravaged Europe. They conquered Sicily after a campaign of some 75 years (Sicilians always were tough it seems). The plundered the Mediterranean seacoast and the Italian Peninsula at will, at times ranging as far north as Switzerland and Pillaged Rome itself.

These crises were aggravated by the rise of another foreign menace, the Arabs or, as the Middle Ages Italians called them, the Saracens: these newcomers, sailing from their bases in Northern Africa, had conquered Sicily and had began a steadily penetration in Southern Italy. Infiltration of band of pirates brought terror in the territories around Rome. Under Pope Paschal I (817-824) all the spoils of the holy martyrs were transferred into the walls. But this move did not prevent a groups of Muslim to predate the St. Peter's Basilica itself, which was outside the ancient walls, sacking it in 846. In 852 Pope Leo IV commissioned therefore the construction of another wall around an area on the opposite side of the Tiber from the seven hills of Rome, which has since been called the Leonine City.

Now let us proceed to the next century, when the Caliph of Eqypt ordered the total destruction of ALL Christian Churches in the Muslim Empire, including the Church of the Holy Sepulcher the Holiest Shrine in Christendom.

October 17, 1009 Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulcher Destroyed

by the Staff or associates of Christian History Institute.
? Copyright 1999-2005. All rights reserved.

In the year 1009, al-Hakim, the Caliph of Egypt, ordered the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem destroyed. Workmen obeyed; and Yahia ibn Sa`id, an Islamic historian, wrote: "...the holy deed commenced on Tuesday, the fifth day before the end of the month of Safar of the year 400 of the Egira." Converting from the Muslim calendar would place the destruction on or about this day, October 17, 1009.

In the reign of Caliph Al-Hakim (996-1020) all churches and synagogues were looted and demolished or converted into mosques. For a while they were allowed to be rebuilt but in 1058 all churches were closed. Persecution continued throughout the centuries and the number of Copts grew fewer and fewer. At the time of the Muslim conquest there had been twenty five million Christians with forty five thousand churches and monasteries but by the beginning of the nineteenth century they had fallen to one hundred and fifty thousand with two hundred and fifty partially destroyed churches.

Finally all pilgramiges were stopped. Which would be like a Western Power having control of the MidEast denying Muslims access to Mecca.

That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense

.

So that was the Origin of the Crusades, not a War of Aggression, but a responce to an unrelenting War of Aggression.

That phase of history last a few brief Centuries and when they passed, what was the result? About 4 centuries on unstopped Conquest, Pillage and Plunder of Eastern Europe, until the Muslim Armies were defeated at the Gates of Vienna in 1683.

The Crusades were a little over two centuries of Christain Victory in a thousand years of Conquest by the Muslim Empire.

As I quoted above, " At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.", and today the West is again under threat and attack by Jihadist Militants/

At some point a Culture has to defend itself.

Here is a map of the areas Conquered by Islam, if placed a grain of rice on the areas of Crusader Reconquita in the MidEast it would problem cover them.

Here is a grahic representation of Global Jihad via

Expansionism of Radical Islam at The Reality Show

And here is some eye opening graphical evidence of what we face at home from THE ATHEIST JEW with Time To Qualify My Ideology Again

They Are So Crusader Armies

|

The Open Trackback Alliance XXVII
For your listening pleasure while you browse

"Der er et yndigt land" (There Is A Lovely Land)

Words by: Adam Gottlob Oehlenschlager
Music by: Hans Ernst Kr?yer
Adopted: 1844

"Derer et yndigt land" was first performed for a large gathering of Danes in 1844, and became popular quickly with the Danish people. It was adopted later that year by the Danish government as a national anthem, but not the sole national anthem. This anthem is on equal status with "Kong Christian",which is both the national and royal anthem.

When the Danish anthem is usually performed or sung, the first verse is played in its entirety, then it is followed by the last four lines of the last verse. (This is true whether the lyrics are sung or not



Recentlty I have been posting music to Illustrate the Diversity of America, this week I have a different motive to express Solidarity with DENMARK

I maintain my Support of Denmark, and will later today, post links to and my thoughts about a Danish Editorial "We are being pissed upon by Per Nyholm "

I think I shall title my Post, "There is no "But" in "Freedom of Speech".




When I first started upon my journey through the blogverse I created a Statement of Purpose
Now upon reading it, one can realize that I did not hold to every detail of that original statement, but from it's basic premise, I have never swayed, in my belief that the Blogs are in fact the Committees of Correspondence of the Second American Revolution.

And that it is a Revolution of Information, no longer can we afford and allow elite gateways to control what we can see, hear and discuss.

For I believe that those bloggers who find their way, here and in particular from the Blogs associated with Sam.

HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.

Some of us are more Serious, some of us are more lighthearted and some post the common ordinary things that make one smile and recall that Life without the simple things to treasure is meaningless.

And it is important that all have a platform from which to speak.

As I understand this process you can link to this post and trackback to this post on ANY subject or post you think important. It is open. I will repeat this every Monday.

The Committees of Correspondence welcomes your intelligent comments. And also welcomes you to join the

OPEN TRACKBACK ALLIANCE

This week I also have shortened my usual introduction for a more inportant message.

In it's struggle for Freedom of Speech.

Sign the Petition NOW!

JEG opstille hos Danmark!

44039 Total Signatures 01:35 AM CST 15 May, 2006 We can do better pass the word~!

From Agora a call to Support the Manifesto online by signing another Petition, why not sign both?


MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism
Created by Mark Jefferson on March 1st, 2006 at 5:42 pm AST

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.
We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all. "

Blogs that Trackback to this Post:

On Monday
Extreme Makeover in Rockland? from Tor's Rants
La stampa Israeliana attacca Liberazione from Camelot Destra Ideale
Linkfests for May 15, 2006 from Linkfest Haven
Screwtape 2006: The Democratic Outlook from Adam's Blog
Iranian Insurgents from 123beta
Best Work of American Fiction of the Last 25 Years from third world county
Do You Want to Win or Lose? from Blue Star Chronicles
Does this blog need a facelift? from Sed Vitae
Will anyone outside of Minnesota notice or care? from The Florida Masochist
Men are not mind readers from Planck's Constant
Tonight's Speech: Baby Steps from The Amboy Times
Making The Army Of Reconquista from Strong As An Ox And Nearly As Smart

Y'al come back now, Y'heah? ;-)

|

Could America, Really Be The Lost Tribe of Israel?
Everyone knows it is an article of Faith in some regions that America is in the grip and controlled by the Worldwide Zionist Conspiracy.

Just ask any member of al-Qaeda, citizen of France, bureaucrat of the UN, or EU functionary.

They will explain how the Zionists are in control of Bush, Cheney, the Pentagon and that if it were
not for that, America would heed the advice of
more "Lucide et Sophistique" European Intellects, abandon its foolish support of Israel and usher in an era of World Peace.

Usually the story is about sinister machinations in the Halls of Power and the Towers of Capitalism.

But I heard something tonight that rang a clarion call inside my mind.

Forget all the above, nothing about Commerce, Geopolitics or Worldwide Zionist Conspiracies can explain why in recent times two of THE most popular names in America for baby boys have been

Jacob:: Seed of Israel, Patriarch of the Jewish Race

and

Joshua: First Judge of Israel who commanded the
conquest of the Philistine Nations.

Sinister cabals of influence can accomplish many things but to influence how vast numbers of couples name their sons? No that comes from the Cultural Archetypes, the Ancestral Psyche of a People.

Could America really BE the Lost Tribe of Israel, made manifest in the flesh in the Present Times?

Could al-Qaeda and the others be correct, but not in the way they think?

You come up with an explanation for the prevalence of these names in young baby boys in America.

Top 10 Baby Names

Linked to

OTA Weekend at The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns

|

The Greatest Form of Patriotism
Hat Tip Protein Wisdom in

Kerry on my wayward war hero

The Volokh Conspiracy’s Jim Lindgren quotes John Kerry, who, in the course of a speech yesterday at Grinnell College in Iowa, managed to cram a number of dubious assertions into an admirably compact soundbite—presumably as a way to reinforce the ignorance of the student activist class that the Democratic left so relies upon for vocal outrage:

Dismissing dissent is not only wrong, but dangerous when America’s leadership is unwilling to admit mistakes, unwilling to engage in honest discussion, and unwilling to hold itself accountable for the consequences of decisions made without genuine disclosure, or genuine debate. As Thomas Jefferson said, “dissent is the highest form of patriotism."

I will have to admit that quote sounds very profound and Jefferson could have been justly proud for uttering it if he had.

Which is not the case, at least according to The Volokh Conspiracy in

Thomas Jefferson's Love of Dissent.-

According to the Jefferson Library:

"There are a number of quotes that we do not find in Thomas Jefferson's correspondence or other writings; in such cases, Jefferson should not be cited as the source. Among the most common of these spurious Jefferson quotes are: 'Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.'

I have a suggestion for Mr Kerry.

When "Speaking Truth to Power"? (I believe that is one of the New Mantras of the Progressive Left), try to ensure that what you are saying Is true?


Am I accusing Mr Kerry of Uttering a deliberate Lie?

No

Am I accusing Mr Kerry speaking about something of which he knows nothing about?

You have a mind, what do you think.

Actually Dissent IS an important aspect of our Society, and it can have more than one direction.

Some claim to be "Speaking Truth to Power" others merely speak "Truth to Ignorant".

I am using the word ignorant in its true dictionary , not , unlearned, without moral comment. Ignorance, is in fact a curable disease.

I think I will let other voices than mine answer Kerry and his Keystone Kops on one of the Great Issues of our Times.

Someone said awhile back that the

"The moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute

That claim has to rank equally with "Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism."

Without detracting from the moral worth of "dissent" or the "moral authority " parents who bury children killed in combat", I will respectfully differ.

In my eyes the Moral Authority of those who lay down their lives in combat to protect their loved ones and this Nation, is higher, and it is also a Higher Form of Patriotism than words.

Mr Kerry? I dissent from YOU.

And in to your theories about our needs and plans for the MidEast I will choose to let them speak for me.

Most of us have heard ad naseum one single quote from a Zogby Poll reported recently.

U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006

I dare say that was the only quote you heard in the Legacy Media using that Poll as a source.

Big Lizards in That Doggone Zog Blog Hog Slogs Along presents to us a more complete list of the questions and .

Withdrawl

15. How long should U.S. troops stay in Iraq?

1. They should withdraw immediately
2. They should withdraw within the next six months
3. They should withdraw within six to twelve months
4. They should stay as long as they are needed
5. Not sure

51.4% say "immediately" or "next six months;" 72% say within "twelve months.'

This question was the lede in Zogby analysis -- U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006 -- and in some of the stories about the poll. The implication is obvious: morale is low! the soldiers want to go home! they don't believe in the mission! they think we're losing, losing, losing!

But as I noted last time, the real question here is never answered: why do the troops think we should withdraw in twelve months, six months, or immediately? It is because they think we've already lost -- or because they believe we've won, and they take the president at his word that "as the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down?" By "withdrawl," do they mean everyone out, or do they mean drawing down the force level?

The Stars and Stripes article linked above raised this same point:

But Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute, said troops who say the U.S. should withdraw could be concerned for their own safety, or they could be optimistic about progress so far, or they could simply be opposed to the idea of operations in Iraq.

?You have to pick apart each servicemember?s thought process to understand what that means,? he said. ?I think this is about personal circumstances, and not proof there is a higher rate of troops who desire departure.?

What Zogby really needed to ask is whether the troops think the mission has been successful or not, and (as Hugh Hewitt suggested) how high their morale is; that would have told us the why. As it is, we can only infer the why by looking at the next question:

16. According to recent polls, about half of Americans favor a rapid withdrawal and half favor an open-ended occupation of Iraq. Which do you believe best describes the motives of those favoring rapid withdrawal?

1. They are unpatriotic
2. They are not aware of the need for U.S. troops
3. They believe that continued occupation will not work
4. They are against use of the military in preemptive war and "nation building"
5. Other
6. Not sure

51.6% say because "they are unpatriotic" or because "they are not aware of the need for U.S. troops."

Unaware is a more polite synonym for the word I used earlier, and unpatriotic is a more polite word for others that could be used.

I will bet that few have heard this last little tidbit from the Mainstream Media,

It bears repeating with emphasis.

16. According to recent polls, about half of Americans favor a rapid withdrawal and half favor an open-ended occupation of Iraq. Which do you believe best describes the motives of those favoring rapid withdrawal?

51.6% say because "they are unpatriotic" or because "they are not aware of the need for U.S. troops."

Now THAT is what I call "Speaking Truth to Power" and with "Absolute Moral Authority", by those who DO show the "Greatest Form Of Patriotism":

Linked to

OTA Weekend at The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns

|

The Open Trackback Alliance XXVI
For your listening pleasure while you browse

"Der er et yndigt land" (There Is A Lovely Land)

Words by: Adam Gottlob Oehlenschlager
Music by: Hans Ernst Kr?yer
Adopted: 1844

"Derer et yndigt land" was first performed for a large gathering of Danes in 1844, and became popular quickly with the Danish people. It was adopted later that year by the Danish government as a national anthem, but not the sole national anthem. This anthem is on equal status with "Kong Christian",which is both the national and royal anthem.

When the Danish anthem is usually performed or sung, the first verse is played in its entirety, then it is followed by the last four lines of the last verse. (This is true whether the lyrics are sung or not



Recentlty I have been posting music to Illustrate the Diversity of America, this week I have a different motive to express Solidarity with DENMARK

I maintain my Support of Denmark, and will later today, post links to and my thoughts about a Danish Editorial "We are being pissed upon by Per Nyholm "

I think I shall title my Post, "There is no "But" in "Freedom of Speech".




When I first started upon my journey through the blogverse I created a Statement of Purpose
Now upon reading it, one can realize that I did not hold to every detail of that original statement, but from it's basic premise, I have never swayed, in my belief that the Blogs are in fact the Committees of Correspondence of the Second American Revolution.

And that it is a Revolution of Information, no longer can we afford and allow elite gateways to control what we can see, hear and discuss.

For I believe that those bloggers who find their way, here and in particular from the Blogs associated with Sam.

HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.

Some of us are more Serious, some of us are more lighthearted and some post the common ordinary things that make one smile and recall that Life without the simple things to treasure is meaningless.

And it is important that all have a platform from which to speak.

As I understand this process you can link to this post and trackback to this post on ANY subject or post you think important. It is open. I will repeat this every Monday.

The Committees of Correspondence welcomes your intelligent comments. And also welcomes you to join the

OPEN TRACKBACK ALLIANCE

This week I also have shortened my usual introduction for a more inportant message.

In it's struggle for Freedom of Speech.

Sign the Petition NOW!

JEG opstille hos Danmark!

43803 Total Signatures 00:002 AM CST 8 May, 2006 We can do better pass the word~!

From Agora a call to Support the Manifesto online by signing another Petition, why not sign both?


MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism
Created by Mark Jefferson on March 1st, 2006 at 5:42 pm AST

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.
We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all. "

Blogs that Trackback to this Post:

On Monday
La inaccettabile logica proprietaria dei Ds from Camelot Destra Ideale
What to do if your child is allergic to McDonald's from Planck's Constant
Late to the Loompanics Closing Party from Tor's Rants
Sammenhold Round-up II from Blue Star Chronicles
Media Bias - Say it ain't SO! from Blue Star Chronicles
Good or Evil from Blue Star Chronicles

Y'al come back now, Y'heah? ;-)

|

Strongly Disapprove
and
Definitely Vote Against
It is sometimes hard to compare two polls whose labels use different language, but I will make an attempt.

I will start with the assumption that

Strongly Disapprove (of) is equivalent to (will)Definitely Vote Against.

Does that sound reasonable? I do not think that

Somewhat Disapprove (of) relates the same animus as (will)Definitely Vote Against.

If you do not agree, then please explain your Logic in my comments section.

The reason for my writing the above in such ambiguous terms is because we are often Inundated with polemics about Bush's declining Poll Numbers while at the same time Hillary Clinton is mentioned in hush terms as the most likely Candidate to get the Democratic Presidential Nomination in 2008 and lead them to a Final Solution vis a vis the Repugicans.

So what IS the Reality?

Here are the latest results on the Rasmussen Polling Site (who favored Kerry in the last election, I might add for balance)

.

I have made the jpgs above hyperlinks to the pertinent articles, be advised as time goes on the figures will alter in the articles.

But it does seem to me that the catastrophic Non-approval rating for Bush of

"Strongly Disapprove(e) 40%"

bears a strong resemblance to the Non-approval rating of Hillary

"Def(initely) Vote Against 39%"

What do YOU think?

|