Kyrgyzstan: Another Muslim Problem

very interesting post from www.badeagle.com about Kyrgyzstan.This follows this post about another attempt to enter Gaza. (h/t Hugh Hewitt). This follows this post about Genocide in South Africa and this article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Kyrgyzstan: Another Muslim Problem
by David Yeagley · ShareThis

Kyrgyzstan (on the southewestern borders of the old Soviet Union) is in the news. Intense violence is terrorizing the people. The media talking points are the refugeees, their needs and numbers, and a few names of leaders in the region. Predictably, the Muslim element in the story is left out entirely.
AP offers an incredibly inappropriate and inaccurate report from Barry Schweid, which is nothing more than his personal political fantasies. “Analysis: A new venue for US-Russian cooperation.” This was yesterday, June 16, 2010. The Muscovites are not interested in “cooperation” with the United States, never have been, and never will be. Russia is not to be considered European, either, in any traditional sense of the word. Schweid writes as some wistful American academic Communist, in sophormoric reminiscence over the old days of Russian glory. It is a pitifully biased and superfical piece, naming only a few local “political” players in Kyrgyzstan.
Uzbek refugees fleeing Kyrgyzstan, in a glorious liberal slide showattempting to condemn Kyrgystan for nationalism.
The major talking point is the refugee problem. The fleeing Kyrgyz people are amassing at their western border with Uzbekistan. “UN: 400,000 now uprooted by Kyrgyzstan unrest.” The region is chock full of competing ethnic groups, and this is the news story, those who are suffering. Never mind why. Human suffering justifies any course of action to relieve it. This is pure Communism.
To be sure, “ethnic” conflict is code word for “religious” conflict, and that is code for MUSLIM conflict.
We have to go back to a 2005 Reuter’s article to get a picture of the Muslim elements in these artifical ethnic corrals in southern Russia. In “Five facts about Uzbekistan’s Ferghana valley” (May 17, 2005), we read:
The Ferghana valley’s seven million inhabitants make it the most densely populated region of Central Asia. It has suffered ethnic violence and unrest since Soviet times. Clashes that killed dozens drove the Meskhetian Turk minority out of the region in 1989, while Kyrgyz and Uzbeks battled over land rights at the same time.Uzbekistan’s secular government says the valley is a hothouse of Muslim extremists aiming to set up an Islamic state in the region. The government has locked up thousands of suspected militants, drawing sharp criticism from rights groups.
This is precisely the kind of information lacking in the latest reports on the Kyrgyzstan crisis. And then there are these details of the Uzbekistan valley situation:
The valley is largely ethnically Uzbek but is split between Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in a confused patchwork of Soviet-era borders which often leave enclaves of one country surrounded by the territory of another. In general, Uzbekistan holds the valley floor, Tajikistan holds its narrow mouth and Kyrgyzstan holds the high ground around.
Clearly, these details are templatic, if not archtypical.
While the latest AP reports of the Kyrgyzstan crisis note the conflict is between “ethnic” Uzbeks minority within the majority Kyrgyz people within Kyrgyzstan, the reports do mention the aspect of the heroin trade, and the fact that whatever government is in charge is dependent on the Afghan heroin trade for support. Of course, in the absense of fabulous life styles in the area, we presume the heroin trade supports military efforts–i.e., terrorism, i.e., Muslim conflict. Of course, Muslims are quite willing to slaughter other Muslims, as well as non-Muslims.
The point here is that the media is very much afraid to address any Muslim involvment, let alone culpability. The media exists to praise Islam. The liberal media is an instrument of Islam. That’s the reality we live with.
It appears that the Muslim Uzbeks in Kyrgyzstan are unwelcome. Not that Kyrgystan is averse to Islam (the population being reportedly 80% Muslim), but the government of Kyrgystan is understood to be “secular.” This is a fantastic concept to operate in a Muslim region. It is no doubt at least partly the cause of the conflict. The Uzbeks are more aggressively Muslim, or certainly more “liberal” in their complaints of “genocide.”
One has to reconsider the Serbian conflict over Kosovo. “Ethnic” Albanians (i.e., Muslims) horded into the Serbian province of Kosovo, and in due time, claimed it as their own territory. Serbia was universally condemned for defending its own land, race, and religion (Seriban Orthodox Christian).
It looks like the media is spinning the same kind of story on Kyrgyzstan. The Kyrgyz are expected to bow to foreign rule, basically. Just because its there. Just because an Uzbek community wants to rule. “The audacity of hope,” it’s called here in America, by an alien, black African Communist liar.
The liberals always take the side of whomever appears to be attacked, never mind why they’re being attacked. The media denigrates the defender, always. The media is like a soccer referee. He always sees the retaliation, but rarely the initial offense.
The Uzbeks in Kyrgyzstan want a constitutional referendum? How “democratic.” It’s the Communist manoeuver against any establishment. Well, maybe the conflict in Kyrgyzstan centers around heroin income (which is generally related to arms). Maybe the Kyrgyz simply don’t want a minority ruling any part of their country–especially when that minority has a country of it’s own.
We can be sure of this: Communist, Muslims, liberals, and other tyrannists, all rush to support any “ethnic” minority in conflict. It’s called racial agitation, a basic move in the Communist play book. This is their attempted moral justification for disrupting majority establishment. Any kind of minority will do, be it ethnic, religious, or gender-based. Liberals and other tyrannists apparently want to see only one kind of majority establishment: their own. Like North Korea, like China, like Iran, and like Russia still dreams of. Like Venezuela, like Cuba, and like the alien in the White House wants to see in America.
Posted by David Yeagley