DR. S. AUSAF SAIED VASFI analyses the US military course meant to brainwash military officers against Islam and prepare them, if need be, to launch a Hiroshima-like attack (Allah forbid) on the holy cities of Makkah and Madinah.
What is the degree of hate against Islam and Muslims, inculcated systematically into the minds and hearts of the American government, civilians and military officials? Does the United States, or, to be exact, did the United States do so officially?
A 300-word story, datelined Washington, May 11, done by the Associated Press, reveals:
“A course for US military officers has been teaching that America’s enemy is Islam in general, not just terrorists, and suggesting that the country might ultimately have to obliterate the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina without regard for civilians, following precedents such as of nuclear attack on Hiroshima.”
QUINTESSENTIAL QUESTION
Before proceeding further, let the plural Bharat, not in undue haste, ask itself: Did any political, central or regional party including the Congress take note of the outrage? Did any Human Rights organisation express alarm at the things to come? Did any English, Hindi or regional language prominent paper care to do an editorial on the issue? Did Parliament pass any resolution on the US threat not only to Muslims but to the entire one-fifth of mankind? If not, why? Do the Muslims not constitute the principal minority of multi-religious and multi-cultural country? Is the 170-million strong Muslim minority an unknown group, little known in the country?
The story referred to above is from the proverbial horse’s mouth. Reverting to the subject, to quote its other key points by a top military officer:
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
“They hate everything you stand for and will never exist with you, unless you submit,” inspector Army Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley said last July at Joint Forces Staff College in Northfolk, Virginia. Dooley also presumed for the purpose of his theoretical war plan that the Geneva Convention was “no longer relevant”.
He added: “This would leave open the option once again of taking war to a civilian population whenever necessary (the historical precedents of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki being applicable).” His war plan suggested possible outcomes such as “Saudi Arabia threatened with starvation…. Islam reduced to cult status” and the Muslim holy cities of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia “destroyed”.
A copy of the presentation was posted online by Wired.com’s Danger Room blog. A Pentagon spokesman authenticated the documents. Dooley still works for the college, but is no longer teaching, Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey said.
TALKING POINTS
The course “Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism” was an elective taught since 2004. It was offered five times a year with about 20 students each time.
For the sake of clarity, we enumerate below the talking points of the story:
1) It is not only the Muslim terrorists but Islam as an ideology or religion that is the enemy of the United States. Therefore, with a view to getting rid of the foe, the erasal of the two holy shrines in Makkah and Madina from the surface of the soil is also necessary. Let the US military should not attach undue importance to the destruction of human life as collateral damages are understandable in an all-out war, as the world saw in a Hiroshima-like situation without which the ‘menace’ of Islam cannot be dealt with effectively.
2) Islam and Christianity or Judaism cannot live amicably, side by side. For the survival of the later liquidation of the former is a must.
3) The international covenants like the Geneva Convention should not bother the conscience of the US military. In such cases they seize to be relevant.
4) If taking war to the civilian populaces becomes necessary, it should be taken confidently. There are precedents to justify the American action, like Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
5) The possible outcomes like starvation deaths of the Saudis, assumption of the cult status of Islam or destruction of Ka’ba or Masjid al-Nabavi should not deter the American bombers.
Like Hitler’s ‘final solution’ this is America’s final solution, which, if you go deeper, smacks of the Zionist thinking and strategy.
That this course has now been suspended is not the news. The news is that the hideous face of Pentagon, representing the anti-Islamic sentiment among the Christian and Jewish brethren has, once again, been unmasked.
CRUSADES CONTINUE?
Side news is that the Kansas Senate has, not long ago, approved a bill that effectively obliterates the Islamic Shari’ah in the State. The number of yes-votes was 34 while the no-votes were only four. This should not distract our attention from the central point which is that the unipolar United States is, and has been, at war with Islam. The logical inference of this belligerent strategy is that an American soldier must know that wherever he is fighting or is going to fight in the future he must consider his fight as against Islam. In brief and simple words, it means the crusades continue, and continue unabated. It is clear that in this Christian Zionist jihad, the US, the UK and the entire Europe are united. The difference lies in degree alone.
In this disquieting backdrop let the US Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Secretary for Information think coolly what repercussion they expect from the Arab Islamic world for letting out the said secret. Do they think the Muslims in general would take it in stride?
The heady wine of power seems to have totally blinded the already purblind US administration’s egg-headed leadership. Has nobody read history there? Where are the Pharaohs today? Don’t go far. Where is Hitler? Did it ever occur to the Fuehrer that one day he could commit suicide in a bunker in St. Helina? Were these insignificant footnotes in history not more powerful in their times than the Pentagon, the US and its partners in crimes against humanity?
The explicit threat to the Harmain painfully compels us, the Indian Muslims in general and their leadership in particular to ask the Guardian of the two Holy Mosques: How does he propose to confront the bellicose America? An onerous responsibility rests on his shoulders. Perhaps the Saudi King knows that the Islamic world as a whole does not feel at ease, much less enthusiastic about the Saudi extraordinary proximity with the United States because of the latter’s irrational and unhelpful attitude towards the transplanted Israel. Being what he is, King Abdullah is expected to care for his co-religionists’ responsibility.
There is no mechanism in the entire West Asian region as well as North Africa which may provide some semblance of hope or relief. The much touted OIC has been reduced to the status of a debating society, heavily punctuated with verbosity. Our morbid feeling is that all the His Majesties, His Highnesses, and His Excellencies hang together urgently before they are hanged together by the United States of America.