Buner falls without a fight

[Hellfire]

More to the point, you can expect that some entity will be rigorous in their enforcement of said ban. Weapons, naturally, being the ultimate arbiter, the taliban know what the Pakistani state hasn't. Ornamental or not, it's time for all weapons to be taken out of the public's hands except for those invested by the state to make legalized violence.

I applaud what they've done. I only regret that this wasn't done by your nat'l gov't years ago to preclude the rising to power of such entities. This is intended to identify, rapidly, any potential threat to the new prevailing power. Nothing else.

Very clever but this is raw consolidation of power executed with a maestro's touch and in virtuoso style.

All hail the conquering heros of SWAT. Now it's on to Buner.

beg to differ sir .... its further in ... onto Haripur district much nearer to Islamabad than Buner .....

 

[Neo]

Closed for moderation.

 

[S-2]

Though neither Buner, SWAT, nor the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan, this story is familiar enough and points to the reach of these monsters. Where there's no state, the taliban thrive. Note the words of the provincial govenor of Nimroz.

Taliban Execute Eloping Couple In Nimroz-AP

The faces and places change but the song remains the same...

 

[SurvivoR]

Though neither Buner, SWAT, nor the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan, this story is familiar enough and points to the reach of these monsters. Where there's no state, the taliban thrive. Note the words of the provincial govenor of Nimroz.

Taliban Execute Eloping Couple In Nimroz-AP

The faces and places change but the song remains the same...

This has nothing to do with Islamic sharia not Buner because there is no such provision in Islam which allowes this without any fair trial.


This has more to do with tradition, customs but not sharia.

And this happend in Afghanistan so kindly do not try to mislead readers no matter how much you mentioned that it has nothing to do with Buner or Bajaur but readers here arround the globe will read it in the same breath.



Thanks

 

[Hellfire]

S-2


Sir.

In consonance of my claim of Haripur threat, the following link will be an interesting read if you have not already gone through it

http://www.twincities.com/ci_12135969

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/14/world/asia/14punjab.html

Punjab province being the heartland of Pakistan, will be under the maximum threat as for Sindh, the Talibs will have to contend with MQM which is determined to hold its ground and is strong enough a force to face them within Sindh having gained experience from fighting Pakistani forces previously in early part of 90s. So Punjab will be an interesting setting as it houses more than half of Pakistani population and is kind of the seat of "political power" in Pakistan.

A troublesome aspect as the imminent threat to Haripur (which is about 64 Kms north of Islamabad) and Abbotabad will get the Talibs in striking distance of Islamabad which is a center of axis for any operation (in purely political and psychological terms) as the fall of Islamabad will entail the imminent collapse of Pakistani State as single unified administrative and political entity

regards

 

[muse]

In his "Free for All?" Ejaz haider says the following :

It is difficult to accept that our trade presupposes a free for all.

Here, on our forum, should a similar not be debated by our adm, mods and forum members?

Looky here, What Ejaz is asking is whether or not a VALUE judgement needs to be madse and suggests that it's "difficult" to accept that there is apresupposition of a "Free for All" -- in other words, it is not a free for all, that a value judgement must be made, what are for, what are we against, what will we tolerate, what we will not, will we be dedicated to enquiry, to truth, or excuses for truth --

Look again, has Ejaz suggested that the public is owed a position based on the numbers????? No, Sir, regardless of the numbers, no Free for All -

I encourage Admin and mods and forum members to consider.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

In his "Free for All?" Ejaz haider says the following :

"It is difficult to accept that our trade presupposes a free for all."

Here, on our forum, should a similar not be debated by our adm, mods and forum members?

Looky here, What Ejaz is asking is whether or not a VALUE judgement needs to be madse and suggests that it's "difficult" to accept that there is apresupposition of a "Free for All" -- in other words, it is not a free for all, that a value judgement must be made, what are for, what are we against, what will we tolerate, what we will not, will we be dedicated to enquiry, to truth, or excuses for truth --

Look again, has Ejaz suggested that the public is owed a position based on the numbers????? No, Sir, regardless of the numbers, no Free for All -

I encourage Admin and mods and forum members to consider.

If the 'value judgment' you are asking for is one where we censor or ban those who advocate violence and support violent extremists in Pakistan, then that is one we have made. That is why people like Warraich and hasang do not post here any more.

If on the other hand you are asking us to censor or ban posters who support Shariah and political parties that use religion as a tool (non-violently), or allege Indian involvement in terrorism in Pakistan, then the forum administration unanimously disagrees with your position.

While reading the arguments for and against the NAR implemented in Swat, we are cognizant of the fact that support for the Shariah (NAR) may be used as a means of support for the Taliban, and we will act to censor/warn/ban any who choose that route.

This forum's position continues to be that the TTP and TTP-S are violent extremists and terrorists, despite the fact that the GoP and GoNWFP have essentially legitimized the TTP-S (they say with certain 'conditions').

All of you can feel free to bring to the moderators attention any instances of members supporting the TTP, TTP-S or AQ, and appropriate action will be taken.

I feel our 'value judgment' on this issue is reasonable.

If there is a need to expand upon the restrictions we have, specific cases can be brought to the administration's attention in the suggestions section, and arguments in favor and against presented.

 

[muse]

..you are asking us to censor or ban posters who support Shariah and political parties that use religion as a tool (non-violently),

Lets visit this idea of non-violent USE of religion - here of course, lets be clear, we all know we are speaking of shariah - isn't that so?

Non-violent Shari'aah?? Is there such a thing? Show me!

In fact there is not a single instance of a political organization in Pakistan that USES religion (a noxious idea in itself) that does so without violence associated with it.

You say Warriach and Hasng are banned and I welcome it, however threads that use religion to misdirect and confuse Pakistanis proliferate here - now I will agree some can serve to educate, but those threads are far and few in between - and the fact those threads appear on the WOT board is itself a reflection of their intenht, is it not, non -violent intent, that is.

 

[S-2]

"And this happend in Afghanistan so kindly do not try to mislead readers no matter how much you mentioned that it has nothing to do with Buner or Bajaur but readers here arround the globe will read it in the same breath."

Thanks but I'll continue posting as I see relevance and I do here. You may suggest custom but I'll suggest that the article makes clear that this contravenes the writ of the Afghani state and they were taliban.

Mislead?

My language was plain including my note as to location.

You highlight issues of comprehension. That's beyond my purview, sir.

 

[jeypore]

BUNER: Militants extended their patrolling to new parts of the district and have started preaching at different mosques asking local youth to join their fold and assume control of their areas.
Giving sermons in different mosques at Sultanwas, Pacha, Bhai Kaly, Malkpur, Kalakheelam, Jure, Bagra, Manyarai, Gokand, and other areas they stated that the Tehrik-i-Taliban had its roots both within and outside of the country and the local population should join them for spreading the message of Islam.
They called upon all the people to allow their near and dear ones to join the ranks of Taliban for enforcement of Shariah laws in the Malakand division and rest of the country.
The militants extended their patrolling to the villages in Chamla Tehsil on Sunday as the law enforcing agencies continued to remain indifferent to their movement and activities.
‘We are in constant touch with the leadership of Taliban in Swat and the situation will return to normal in next few days,’ said the Buner district coordination officer Jawed Ahmad.
The DCO told Dawn by phone: ‘We have adopted policy of restraint as a slight mistake could derail the entire peace initiative launched by the government. These Taliban are peaceful and have till now not harmed any individual in the district.’
He dispelled the impression of any recruitment by the Swat Taliban in Buner stating that they had not received any such report. He added that the local people had entered into an agreement with the Taliban in Swat through a jirga.
A local police official told Dawn that the latest weapons carried by these Taliban had turned into a source of attraction for the youngsters who had been roaming with them in large number. ‘I fear that in next few days they will be joined by sizeable number of people mostly youngsters and will announce their organization setup in Buner,’ he added.
On Sunday a leader of the Swat Taliban, Maulana Khalil, delivered a sermon at a mosque in Malakpur village during which leaders of Ishaat –Al-Sunnah-wat-Tauheed, Maulana Minhajudeen and Maulana Tajur Rehman and large number of locals welcomed him.
He said that Pakistan came into existence on the name of Islam but despite the passage of 60 years that objective could not be achieved. He said that the movement for enforcement of Islamic Shariah in Malakand Division was started 20 years ago, but the desire goal could not be achieved through peaceful means and thus armed movement was started.
Maulana Khalil urged the local youth to come forward and shoulder responsibility of their localities. The local population has now been trying to adjust themselves with the Taliban and large number of them is visiting them at Sultanwas, Pir Baba and rest of their stations.
As the Taliban assured them complete peace in case of no resistance, the people here are averse to any military operation which they view would inflict more problems and devastation on the people.
Moreover, the Taliban remained in the Darbar Pir Baba, Jamia Masjid Pir Baba, Pacha Bazaar, Sultanwas, Bagra, Manyarai, and Gokand as main stations while their patrol continued to rest of district unabated. Their presence continued in the shrine of a saint Pir Baba as the management of the shrine has now been barred from entering the premises.

Let us build Pakistan: Buner finally falls to Talibans: Thanks to Pakistan Army and NWFP Government !

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Lets visit this idea of non-violent USE of religion - here of course, lets be clear, we all know we are speaking of shariah - isn't that so?

Non-violent Shari'aah?? Is there such a thing? Show me!

Shariah is non violent, Islam is non-violent.

It is certain entities that distort ideology - secularism, religion whatever - for their own ends, and therefore it is the entities that must be condemned, not the ideology they distort.

These extremists claim they are 'Muslims' and 'follow Islam', so should we now condemn anyone who claims to be a Muslim or follows Islam or proselytizes?

Shariah is not the issue - the extremist interpretation of Shariah is the issue.

In fact there is not a single instance of a political organization in Pakistan that USES religion (a noxious idea in itself) that does so without violence associated with it.

You say Warriach and Hasng are banned and I welcome it, however threads that use religion to misdirect and confuse Pakistanis proliferate here - now I will agree some can serve to educate, but those threads are far and few in between - and the fact those threads appear on the WOT board is itself a reflection of their intenht, is it not, non -violent intent, that is.

Other than the ANP (AFAIK)- I cannot think of any political party, secular, moderate or conservative, that has not engaged in violence.

So what should the forum do? Ban mention, and supporters, of all these political parties? The PPP, MQM and JUI-F are a part of the Government of Pakistan - so what do you want us to do about these parties that have committed violence against the State at different points in history?

Or should we pick a cutoff time for violence? If a party has remained largely peaceful since X year, we can support it? Or should we focus on the party platforms and manifestos as they stand today?

You ask for such broad condemnations and censorship that is just not possible. I need you to quantify the attributes that would serve as yardstick for condemnation. I need specificity.

 

[muse]

Shariah is not the issue - the extremist interpretation of Shariah is the issue

.

For God's sake, what the heck is wrong with you - is there non extreme interpretation?? - Again, show me.

These extremists claim they are 'Muslims' and 'follow Islam', so should we now condemn anyone who claims to be a Muslim or follows Islam or proselytizes

Again, what the hck is wrong with you, you should know better than this flimsy argument - what if we change, in the above astatement, the word "Muslim" with the word "communist"

Will you then argue that Communists are bad but communism is OK??

I realize what you are trying to say - unless you first cede that the basis of Shariah is entirely human, your position cannot go further.

See, the problem with it, is the CLAIM, and recall it's just a claim, that it is divine -- a competitor of The Quran Karim, a blasphemy. Unless we first position this CLAIM in it's correct historical, social and political context, we will be unable to get a handle on this problem.

With Khalifat, just as the concept of "Zilallah" justifed and demanded acceptance of the khalifah, similarly, this CLAIM is related to that, after all, if the Khalifa has the kind of connection, recall he is Khalifah and now also , ZilAllah, must not the laws reflect the same connection?

Laws are made by and for men, not for gods -- Laws are made by and for men - unless we understand that Shariah by defintion, requires extra-religious knowledge - why? because it is, and laws are, about more than religious science. If you cede that extra religious knowledge is also required for Shariah, you are already breaking free of the ridiculous claim - now I grant that it was not ridiculous then in it's hoistorical context, but it is certainly ridiculous now.

Now if we understand that shariah is based on past knowledge and the knowledge of the day, we are left to ask, what is gthe nature of knowledge - do ordinary and even learned men, have or can have any knowledge other than emtirely human?????

If it is entirely human, is it stuck in time?? in space ?? in geography?? If it's human, then it evolves, it grows and it contracts, and after all, if it were divine, why would it need to evolve??

What really burn me is that you already know better - and I am, well, I'm trying to understand - we must have some commitment to arriving at a semblance of truth, must we not?

You say, there is no political party in Pakistan that does not use violence - but here you are being clever by half, the argument was not over all political parties, by your own defintion - it was political parties that USE religion and are non-violent - now you admit there is no such thing -- and you ask what must we then do?


Very good, that's a start - by your own defintion and by your own admission there is no political party in Pakistan that USES (ABUSES) religion that does so without using violence - We are back to the value judgment are we not?? And we have to make it!! If we did not it would be as if we know what the right thing to do is but do not have the courage to do it -- a long term pakistani problem, for sure but we can take the step and end it now, here.


See AM, those of us who are Muslims, cannot acede, that in our name, in the name of our religious faith,in the name of our nationality, that we accept corruption and corrupters - we just can't, because it's not the right thing to do. We have made a value judgement and have reject these corruptions. In however you will choose to examine the issue, I will request that you keep this in mind.

Let me see if I can try and explain in another way -- as we are a Muslim folk, by our relgious teaching we have every conviction that there is a "Shaiytan", do we not?? In your zeal to appear to be fair, will you give a voice to "Shaiytan"??

Look at this in the terms of Value judgement -- we, the Muslim folk, love Allah and fear the loss of this love, we take a giant leap of faith, we trust Allah -- Do we have faith in Shaiytan? Do we trust Shaiytan? DO we love Shaiytan? Astaghfarullah! Shall we not censor Shaiytan??? Who then are these radical murders but the minions of Shaiytan??

The role of leadership (your role) -- How did we as a Muslim Folk arrive at this VALUE judgement ? Who made it clear to us? What made it clear to us? Was it the benevolence of leaders to distinguish between right and wrong and good and bad? Leadership points the way, and in these horrible times, your responsibilty to do just that is even more so, don't let us down.

 

[fatman17]

analysis: A report from the front —Salman Tarik Kureshi

It is the very clear responsibility of the elected government, no less of the opposition, to come completely clean to Pakistan’s citizens and motivate them with counter-propaganda to the near-treasonous ranting emanating from the pulpits and the electronic media. And it is a responsibility that our political leadership has failed to address

little over a month ago, a convoy of vehicles, full of Taliban fighters openly sporting heavy weaponry, drove down from the Buner valley all the way through Swabi district. For those of my readers who may not be familiar with the region, Swabi district abuts Tarbala Dam on the east (yes, Tarbela Dam!) and comes down to the M-1 Motorway at Jahangira. It is a district where tobacco and food grains are grown by some of the hardest working farmers in the country, and where there are cigarette factories and a substantial cottage industry.

Probably passing one of the ancient pillars carrying the edicts of Emperor Asoka, which stands near the road, this deadly convoy moved on to the district of Mardan. This district is the primary agricultural and industrial hub of the NWFP. Here, they grow sugar cane, tobacco, cotton, wheat and food grains. It is one of the centres of the nation’s sugar and tobacco industries.

To get here from Swabi, the Taliban convoy crossed the river at Hoti Bridge (no marks for guessing which famous family has its seat here!) and then drove into the city of Mardan itself — the second largest city of the province. A very few miles to the west is Charsadda and Wali Bagh, the home village of the great freedom fighter Abdul Ghaffar Khan (whose noble soul must be shuddering at the kind of ‘deals’ his grandson has been party to).

Immediately to the south is the Pakistan Air Force training academy at Risalpur. These are the kinds of heavily populated, and presumably well patrolled, areas through which the armed convoy drove — no isolated, mountainous badlands these — before heading north to Malakand and on to Swat.

Their particular mission was not clear, but the point is they were not challenged or queried at any point in their long drive. Neither the Army, nor the Rangers, nor the Police — indeed, not even traffic cops — had the temerity to ask these fearsome looking, heavily armed gents to pause and explain their intended business. I may mention that toting heavy weaponry around openly is illegal, anywhere in Pakistan, even in the NWFP.

In the absence of information or queries, we can only speculate about the purpose of this particular convoy. Was it just a bit of insouciant nose-thumbing at the rest of us, or was there some other design? Whatever may be the case, it is clear that, notwithstanding the protestations of the likes of Mian Iftikhar Hussain, the provincial information minister, we are frighteningly close to the status of there being no functioning government in the NWFP; as in Somalia, where bands of armed yahoos run rampant across the landscape.

In the aftermath of the Swat debacle, the screams of someone’s brutalised daughter are still echoing from our media. The thousands of other screams of Shias torn to pieces and myriads of Pakistani citizens flogged, tortured, flayed, beheaded and shot, still remain unheard. How dare they speak of ‘sovereignty’!

Cyril Almeida wrote in Dawn: “We do not want to live in a society where anyone is flogged, where anyone’s limb is hacked off, where anyone is stoned. Period.”

Does President Zardari or Prime Minister Gilani or former Prime Minster Mian Nawaz Sharif read these kinds of writings? Are we not justified in asking of our elected, democratic government: what is your strategy to deal with this monstrous insurgency? Only capitulation and some feeble rhetoric?[/B]

The president speaks of a three-pronged strategy of “Dialogue, Development and Deterrence”. As to the first of these, let us be quite clear. There are no grounds for dialogue with violent criminals who have declared themselves at war with the state of Pakistan, have seized its formerly sovereign territory and are brutalising its citizens. Even if, out of the cringing cowardice that has become our hallmark, we do allow that there needs to be some kind of talks, it is only too obvious that the other side is ****-a-hoop at the unbroken string of triumphs handed to them and has absolutely no intention of engaging in any kind of dialogue at all.

So much for that. And, as for development, none is going to take place in the present situation. This brings us to deterrence, the military option.

Now, clearly, counter-violence is an insufficient answer and there will certainly be collateral casualties. But, first of all, the playing field has to be evened by restoring the writ of the state through force of arms. This is a necessary first condition to anything else. The problem is that our military is organised and trained for waging conventional warfare against identifiable targets, fighting set-piece battles over more or less even terrain.

Further, the fact is that military force — driven by trucks and tanks and flanked by aircraft and artillery — is a massive blunt weapon, when what is needed is the surgical precision of a scalpel. Counter-insurgency (COIN) needs a many-layered, finely calculated approach. It is at bottom a battle for hearts and minds, a contest for the allegiance of a population, to separate them from and turn them against the rebels who shelter among them.

The first point to be appreciated is that COIN is normally conducted as a combination of conventional military operations with other means, such as propaganda (what the military calls ‘psy-ops’) and even selective assassinations. Counter-insurgency operations include many different facets: military, paramilitary, political, economic, psychological, and civic actions taken to defeat insurgency. As anyone trained in COIN procedures will tell you, they do not include weak-kneed ‘negotiations’ (i.e. give-and-take) of the kind conducted by the NWFP government.

The next point is that, whatever tactical approach or combination of approaches the armed forces determine to use, boots on the ground are an essential feature. As both the Americans in Vietnam and the Russians in Afghanistan learned, you cannot fight this kind of enemy from the air or with artillery and tanks. They have to be engaged on the ground, hand to hand.

The third key point is the need for exceptionally precise intelligence operations. Detailed, timely intelligence will trigger tactical operations by small, rapid response formations trained for the purpose. Now, it is more than likely that these technical aspects of COIN operations are well understood by our armed forces. If so, why does the campaign appear to so lack effectiveness that a few thousand ragtag warriors in Swat triumphed over an organised army 30,000 strong? Is it that the failure of will on the part of the government, federal or provincial, pulled the rug from beneath our soldiers?

This brings me to my final point. Whether there is one kind of military operation or another, it is the political leadership that must demonstrate the will to fight and articulate the needed strategies, policies and actions. It is the very clear responsibility of the elected government, no less of the opposition, to come completely clean to Pakistan’s citizens and motivate them with counter-propaganda to the near-treasonous ranting emanating from the pulpits and the electronic media. And it is a responsibility that our political leadership has failed to address. Even the terms used for those waging war against the state of Pakistan — ‘militants’, askariat-pasand — carry no pejorative connotation. Those with such an ambivalent mindset can wage no war successfully.

The writer is a marketing consultant based in Karachi. He is also a poet

 

[muse]

An editorial from thr DT - Pakistanis are doing their usual escapist thing - the world is conspiring against them -- but perhaps it'sw much later than these escape artists want to admit



Hangu attack and Pakistani mind

If anyone was ever focused on the developments in Hangu, a town within the administrative jurisdiction of the NWFP, he/she could have predicted the latest violence committed there by the TTP warlord Baitullah Mehsud. The violence against the Shia of Hangu had gone on but without moving the conscience of anyone in Pakistan. On Saturday, a suicide bomber drove a van full of explosives into a security checkpost in Doaba on the outskirts of Hangu, killing 27 security personnel.

Mr Baitullah Mehsud is angry at Pakistan for fighting the American war against his Tehreek-e Taliban in general, and for not stopping the American drones from attacking his area in particular. He says he can do more. He has already threatened Lahore and Karachi and doesn’t have to boast about hitting Islamabad because he can do it easily without offending the population there, a large chunk of which follows the spiritual message of Maulana Abdul Aziz, the custodian of the Red Mosque who has just been released on bail by the Supreme Court on grounds of “insufficient evidence”.

In fact, Mr Baitullah Mehsud doesn’t have to mount a campaign to win the hearts and minds of the people of Pakistan. He has already won most of them and is now challenging the establishment to “follow the people” and not the Americans. The ANP government in the NWFP has sued for peace and won a kind of “reprieve of the defeated” while confronting the “liberal” community with the reality of what is happening on the ground. The government in Islamabad wants to fight the war against terror but has told the international community that its perception of threat is different from theirs.

Islamabad described its position on the threat of terrorism quite clearly when it told the Americans recently that it can actually reject economic assistance if it comes with conditions that are not in line with its “national interest”. There is also a gradual streamlining of the perception of threat between the ruling party and the army on the one hand and the opposition and the army on the other. The opposition has its ears close to the ground, anticipating political trouble before the incumbent government completes its five-year term. There is, unfortunately, a large section of opinion on how not to fight terrorism. And terrorism here doesn’t simply mean confronting Mr Mehsud.

This gelling opinion is based on the threat coming first from India and then from America. There is a lot of incomprehensible mishmash of thinking here but this is how the scene is set. Baitullah Mehsud is asking Pakistan to abandon the Americans or at least get them to stop the drone attacks on him. In Pakistan, it is increasingly being said that Baitullah Mehsud is being paid by both America and India to mount terrorist attacks inside Pakistan. To what end, one may ask? The conspiracy-theorists’ answer is apparently simple, “to destabilise Pakistan”. And why is the US doing it? Because, say the conspiracy theorists, the US is ganged up with India to reduce Pakistan to the position of a lackey of hegemonic India. And, of course, all that anticipates the conversion of South Asia into a pro-American bastion against China, according to these people.

The military perception is India-linked. According to this, India is being allowed by the US to dominate Afghanistan and thus saddle Pakistan with a two-front situation, which is not permissible in Pakistan’s strategic thinking. Therefore, it follows from this assumption that the US cannot ask Pakistan to fight the Taliban who attack Afghanistan across the Durand Line unless it helps Pakistan in pacifying the likes of Baitullah Mehsud. And the policy vis-à-vis the Pakistani Taliban is based on seeking peace through negotiation rather than through war. But the Pakistani Taliban will not relent unless the Americans leave Afghanistan, after which the Indians there will have to contend with a Pakistani response.

Most Pakistanis believe that terrorism in the tribal areas and Balochistan is being fomented by India, although no proof has yet been made public about it. Pakistanis also look at America as their enemy which is determined to snatch Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and thus reduce Pakistan to a power of unequal status vis-à-vis India. Retired army officers used as experts of strategy by the TV channels throw in Israel and Mossad as the other destabilising factor in the equation. Given this situation, it is difficult to conceive how the state of Pakistan is morally and psychologically prepared to fight the man who kills its soldiers on a daily basis.

 

[S-2]

"Given this situation, it is difficult to conceive how the state of Pakistan is morally and psychologically prepared to fight the man who kills its soldiers on a daily basis."

I've been writing this for awhile now, maybe a couple of weeks. Your army doesn't need to move. If it waits much longer, the war will come to it. Then the questions are whether it leaves its barracks to fight and for whom?

Or is your army in the east to screen a taliban takeover of Pakistan from the Indians?

I'm befuddled that you have a nat'l emergency-a crisis even in your west that exceeds the local police/law enforcement abilities to the extent that you've new cops in SWAT bringing with them God's law with a local twist that includes immunity for the worthy.

That's sufficiently out of bounds to bring the state down on it like a two ton gorilla in most nations.

Yet your army doesn't move.

It's a pretty flag. Are you a nation?

I think we'll soon find out.

I sure hope so.