the global gomorrah by y. sagamori

8/14/2019 The Global Gomorrah by Y. Sagamori

1/5

The Global Gomorrahby Yashiko Sagamori

Then Abr aham said, May the Lord not be angr y, but let

me speak j ust once more. What if only t en can be f ound

t here? The Lord answered, For the sake of t en, I will notdestr oy it .

Gen. 18

I can remember only two occasions when I watched the Discovery/Times Channel formore than a few seconds in a row. The first time they were showing a documentary aboutSaudi Arabia. There was a room with several women seated around a table. It was difficultto figure out how many of them were there because, covered head to toe with burqas, theyall looked like big, black bowling pins and were just as impossible to tell apart.

The women were trying to outdo each other extolling their incredibly good fortune tohave been born into a culture that went to such drastic extremes to protect their honor. Ilistened for a while how happy they were to have to ask male relatives for a written

permission to leave the house every time they had to go somewhere; how beautiful it wasto become a third wife to a man you had never met until he climbed into your bed to claimyour virginity; how wonderful it was to live without a face that could attract unwantedattention, without a clitoris that might produce a sinful sensation, without a job that mightresult in a dangerous exposure to strangers, without freedom that could be so easilyabused, without practically everything that makes up a normal life of a normal person in a


2/5

normal world.Of course, normalcy is in the eye of the beholder. But while listening to them speak in

Arabic and reading the translation of their halleluiahs in the subtitles, I suddenlyremembered what I had read about the will left behind by Mohammad Atta, the leader ofthe 9/11 highjackers. In his will, Mr. Atta, the great Muslim hero, mastermind andexecutioner of the most spectacular mass murder of modern times, demanded that no

woman, especially no pregnant woman, be allowed to desecrate his holy memory byattending his funeral or visiting his grave. There goes your honor, sisters, I thought. Nomatter what you sing while perched in your cages, your owners will always find a way toremind you that you are nothing but unclean animals.

What can be worse than being a slave? Only being a loyalslave.The other time they were airing a documentary about North Korea. I turned it on during

an interview with a North Korean general. The general was slightly beyond middle age andhad a pleasant outdoorsman's face that radiated confidence and healthy power andlooked a bit incongruous under a wide, richly decorated, Soviet-style military cap. He wasspeaking in a placid, measured tone of voice. He was saying how much he hated theUnited States, how passionately he was dreaming of killing as many Americans as hecould possibly reach, how hopeful he was that now, with the help of new military hardware

developed under the guidance of the Dear Leader , his dream might finally come true. Hecalled it defending our revolution .

After him, they showed a North Korean defector who also used to be in the military,although in a much lower rank. He had served as a guard at a prison camp. People jailedthere were mostly guilty by association with a known criminal, but their association wasnot strong enough to warrant an execution. They were imprisoned together with theirentire families. The inmates had no rights whatsoever. The guards had the power toexecute any of them on the whim, without the formality of a trial. Inmates, who committedoffences that, in the opinion of a guard, deserved to be punished by death, were rarelyexecuted alone. Usually, they went to their doom accompanied by their families andneighbors. The former guard told about an especially memorable day when he personallykilled 31 people. He didn't reveal what any of them had done wrong. He also told how

guards routinely killed babies born to inmates by throwing them on the ground andstepping on their throats. That was not a punishment; that was a routine procedureperformed immediately after birth in front of a still bleeding mother. But even that was notthe most interesting part of his interview.

The main purpose of that particular camp was to test chemical and biological weaponson human subjects. The former guard naively called people who conducted the testsscientists . An inmate didn't have to commit any offense to be used as a guinea pig.

Usually, he or she had to be generally healthy and, sometimes, have some specialphysical characteristics. The former guard told about one particular occasion when heescorted a family, the parents and two young children, a boy and a girl, to a gas chamber.The walls of the chamber were made out of glass so that the progress of the experimentcould be observed. The four were stripped naked and placed inside.

Try to imagine what it was like for them. Even for prisoners of a concentration camp,life goes on as long as they are still alive. Imagine the two adults, suddenly taken awayfrom the grueling daily routine of the camp, thinking of the work that was to be resumedwhen they were allowed to return to their barracks, standing in the middle of a glass cage,trying to cover their nakedness. Imagine the two children, unaware that their life couldhave been very different from what it was, looking with normal children's curiosity at the


3/5

unfamiliar surroundings.Then gas was pumped into the chamber. It didn't kill them instantly. For a while, the

dying parents were trying to save their children by giving them mouth to mouth, but that, ofcourse, didn't work. While they were dying, the scientists positioned around the glasswalls were busily taking notes.

I saw it on the Discovery/Times channel. I believe it would be reasonable to assume

that the New York Timesknows what is being shown on a TV channel it partially owns.Apparently, North Korean atrocities did not fall under the category of news fit to print. Andthat raises the inevitable question of the New York Times's political agenda.

But that's not the only question that comes to mind.We've all heard the version of World War II history a laPat Buchanan that proclaims

that the United States decided to enter the war in order to liberate Jews from Germanconcentration camps. If we were to believe that, we would have to express our regrets thatthe decision didn't come 6 million Jews earlier. But let us not worry about the Jews whohave been dead for so long that the very fact of their pre-Auschwitz existence is easier todeny than to confirm.

Not so long ago, NATO mostly, the United States bombed Yugoslavia out ofexistence for the alleged, but still unproven crime of genocide against its Muslim

population. Why then the United States, along with NATO and the rest of the peace-lovingworld, wouldn't even consider going to war to liberate North Koreans from the NorthKorean concentration camps?

Why did a bra placed by a fool in uniform on the head of a terrorist held in Abu Ghraibattracted more attention of the humankind than the mass murder of North Koreans oreven the mass murder of Iraqis that went on at the very same Abu Ghraib for decades,while Saddam Hussein was in power?

Why the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, where prisoners are kept in morehumane conditions than in any other POW camp in history, although never in historycaptives deserved so little humanitarian concern, excites defenders of human rights somuch more than the tortured death at the hands of Dear Leader's goons of people whohad done nothing wrong?

While the dying parents were desperately blowing poison from their lungs into thepoisoned lungs of their dying children, the institution misnamed the International Court ofJustice was diligently seeking the legal basis for the condemnation of Israel for building afence in an equally desperate (and, predictably, equally futile) attempt to prevent Arabterrorists from murdering Jews. Of the three, only the court achieved its goal. Thepopulation of this planet of ours supported the unjust decision of the unjust court with rareunanimity. Neither the Arab atrocities, nor the Korean ones have succeeded in attractingthe attention of the court or its world-wide courtroom.

To a nave person, this may look like most people on Earth have suddenly lost theirGod-given ability to tell good from evil. Such a hypothesis can be easily disproved. If thehumankind had been choosing between the two randomly, then, in approximately 50% ofthe cases, they would have opted for good. This is not happening. The humankind has

made its choice and is sticking to it.When Israel put Saddam out of nuclear business, the entire world, including the United

States, condemned the unprovoked Israeli aggression against a sovereign country. (In theReagan cabinet, the most enthusiastic proponent of a severe punishment for Israel wasthe then-Vice President George H. W. Bush.) There was no logic in that condemnation.Israel would, no doubt, become Saddam's first target, but believing that it would have


4/5

remained his only target is beyond ludicrous. In 1981, Israel literally saved the world.Years later, the West acknowledged Israel's heroic deed in the most unofficial mannerpossible.

History repeats itself. Today Israel is fighting Hezbollah, and, as it always happens, themajority of governments, organizations, and individuals around the globe condemn Israelfor defending itself. But Israel is not only defending itself. Like Saddam's aborted nukes,

Hezbollah is not just threatening Israel. Its sleeper cells are omnipresent in Westerncountries. What are those countries pushing for? A ceasefire the only way to preventthe demise of Hezbollah at the hands of its righteous nemesis. Why do people want tosave a terrorist organization, which, at the very first opportunity, w ill turn their own citiesinto Beirut on the Thames, Beirut on the Spree, Beirut on the Seine, Beirut on the Tiber?Beats me.

God promised Abraham to bless those who bless Jews and to curse those who cursethem. A few short years ago, you might need some complex reasoning and compellinghistoric examples if you wanted to convince the ignorant that, so far, God has kept Hispromise. On July 24, all the proof you needed could be found in a short documentaryposted on CNN. It showed two Lebanese children severely burned by Israeli bombs. Eventhough the show might have been staged Arabs are well known for this kind of PR and

Western reporters are usually happy to present their productions as documentaries Iknew that Israeli raids on Lebanon have caused civilian casualties, and some of themwere children, and some of those children suffered the way no human being should suffer.

Such is the price the Lebanese people are paying for their hatred of Jews, in general,and their support of Hezbollah, in particular. As terrible as that price is, it doesn't lookunfair or disproportionate to me. You may be a Jew-lover or Jew-hater, Republican orDemocrat, Communist or Nazi, Sunni or Shiite, but as long as you stick to the facts, youmust know that, in the last two thousand years, Jews have been the only people on earthwho have never committed an act of aggression against anyone, including Lebanon.

Nevertheless, CNN will not show you even a two-minute-long movie about thesuffering of Jewish children who have become victims of Arab aggression against Israel,although there is a not too subtle difference between the two groups of victims: The Jews,

including even infants, were targeted deliberately, and the cesspool known as the Arabstreet has supported the attacks enthusiastically and unanimously. Why then should theyand their children be exempt from a similar fate?

Now would be a good time for you to remind me about the Geneva Conventions. TheGeneva Conventions protect the innocent from harm at the time of war. Or do they? In ahypothetical war between Switzerland and Denmark, they might. A hypothetical warbetween Switzerland and Denmark would be fought by properly uniformed armies, andevery person who wasn't armed or wearing uniform would be classified as an innocentcivilian.

But ask any Muslim, and they will tell you that a non-believer cannot be innocent bythe definition, be he or she a member of enemy armed forces or a church choir. This isperfectly logical. Everyone can convert to Islam at any moment. All it takes is a formal

announcement witnessed by Muslims. By choosing not to convert, you are persisting inyour crime of unbelieving; therefore, you are not innocent; therefore, you are not a subjectto the mythical benevolence that, according to Condoleezza Rice, is found at the heart ofIslam. Therefore, killing you, or your child, or your grandmother, or, better yet, all of youtogether, would promote jihad and, therefore, be perfectly legitimate according to Muslimlaws.


5/5

Jihad, which is the only state in which Islam can exist, is an interesting phenomenon.Modern jihad is not fought by armies, and it's easy to see why. Iraq had the most powerfularmy in the entire Muslim world. During its war with Iran, it inflicted terrible devastation onits enemy. But when confronted by the United States military, it was unable to present anyopposition whatsoever. That's why modern jihad is being fought by civilians.

Uniformed soldiers are liable to be shot on sight. Thanks to what we mistake for

humanism, civilians who ambush and blow up our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan aresubject to criminal prosecution, the so called due process . The reality convincinglydemonstrates that the due process is totally senseless in the context of modern jihad.Therefore, the jihadists are fighting us unopposed.

To prove my point, the current Iraqi prime minister is supported not only by the USmilitary. He is also supported by Moqtada al Sadr, the most prominent Shiite warlordopposed to our liberation of Iraq. Al Sadr was allowed to gain his prominence while Iraqwas already occupied by our forces. The very fact that he or any of his followers are stillalive testifies to our inherent weakness and gives us the right to ask what exactly have wewon in Iraq. The answer to that question is simple: exactly nothing.

It is the same with Hezbollah and Hamas. Contrary to what you hear from ourpoliticians, they do not have to disarm. The formidable goals of these organizations cannot

be fulfilled without a prolonged armed struggle. Those goals are wholeheartedly supportedby tens of millions of seemingly moderate Muslims who constitute their power base.Hezbollah and Hamas are responsible to neither Western governments nor nave Westernpacifists. They are solely responsible to those who put them in power. And those who putthem in power want them armed, because Hezbollah and Hamas defend their interests.

Therefore, if you want to take power from Hezbollah and Hamas, disarming them is notan option, because those who put them in power will eventually find a way to arm themagain. Physically exterminating Hezbollah and Hamas is not an option either, becausethose who put them in power will find plenty of others willing to fill the vacancies.Physically exterminating those who put them in power is not an option either, because thatwould have inevitably amounted to genocide, and our civilization prefers to succumb togenocide rather than inflict one, unless, of course, the people on the receiving end of it are

Jews. That's why the UN, along with the entire peace-loving humanity, is so worried aboutthe Lebanese who have been suffering at the hands of the ruthless Israeli agressors foralmost three weeks, but hasn't done squat to protect Jews from the Arab aggression that'sbeen going on for at least 6 decades.

The only remaining option is to attempt to eradicate Islam without eradicating Muslims,because Islam is the motivation behind jihad. Technically, this is possible (rememberWorld War II?), but only technically, because Islam is a religion, and all religions are equalin the eyes of the enlightened Westerners. (I myself believe that all religions are equal onlyto atheists.)

So, what's the solution? There is none, unless we decide to fight jihad in earnest. Butthere is no danger of that. Today, the United States has found it to its political advantageto resist the calls for ceasefire in Lebanon. Tomorrow, as it has happened so many times

in the past, it will change; Israel will be instructed to stop in the middle of a battle, andIslam will be handed yet another victory it could have never won on the battlefield.

the global gomorrah by y. sagamori

Documents