Terrorists cant stop Armies, Money and Oil.

[kandrathe]

Well said.

...It was to someone's benefit that a riot be commenced, or a series of riots, and this latest free speech spat was used as an excuse to have one....[right][snapback]101395[/snapback][/right]

My understanding is that certain Arab regimes have used the republishing of the cartoons as a foil for the political purposes of denouncing the EU nations, and to prop up their regimes Islamo-friendly image. Syria, which runs a hyper police state similiar to what Iraq was under Saddam, probably staged (or allowed) the riots as state tool to discredit certain extremist political enemies and arrest their members. My belief is that the governments of Syria, Egypt, and some other middle eastern politicians are responsible for inflaming the Arab street for political purposes.

But, the US and the West are not entirely blameless. As I said above, sometimes you have every right to do what turns out to be the wrong thing. For some muslims, the irreverent treatment of their prophet by western newspapers is confirmation of a war of ideas targeting and trying to discredit Islam. From your writing above I see you and I agree on the nature of Islam, and that to coexist peacefully in the world Islam must work to shed its justification of violence, enslavement of women, and intolerence of alternative faiths.

I believe the majority of muslims who live in the US and Europe want a peaceful coexistence, but they struggle to win that war of ideas against a vitriolic, violent, well financed and hyper published extremist perspective. So, we in the West, who at times are insensitive to the social and political brush fires of the Islamic world sometimes blithfully toss around gasoline as we please. It seems that in our new interconnected world, a Salman Rushdie, or an editor (e.g. Jyllands-Posten culture editor, Flemming Rose) can toss the match which sets the world on fire. I wholeheartedly support Salman Rushdie's and the Jyllands-Posten rights to publish whatever they desire, no matter how provocative it might be to the Arab street.

Maybe what we need is more insensitive trampling on Islamic fundamentalism, so that raw nerve grows numb. But, I doubt it.

[Occhidiangela]

Well said.

Maybe what we need is more insensitive trampling on Islamic fundamentalism, so that raw nerve grows numb.  But, I doubt it.
[right][snapback]101418[/snapback][/right]

Thanks for the first bit. :) To reply to that last bit.

The past 50 years assault on Christian sensibilities (what Allan Sherman called the Rape of the A*P*E) has benumbed some, and induced a backlash in others. I suspect the same will be the same in the Muslim world.

The "minority of violent jerks" myth needs to be squashed. It only takes a minority of violent and driven folk to upset any number of things in a civilized society, in a civilized world. Their small numbers are made up for by zeal and energy, as well as commitment. It isn't the size of the dog in the fight, it is the size of the fight in the dog. ;)

There aren't all that many folks in Al Qaeda. So what, their zeal and energy have had immense consequences. Black September was not a large organization, their murder of Olympians in 1972 had profound follow on effects. That fact of human interaction won't change any time soon: the driven people change the world for the rest of the people.

It was a small core of revolutionaries who made the Oktober Revolution work.

It was a minority of dedicated men who led the American Revolution.

It was a small, dedicated force under Garibaldi that took Sicily from the Austrians.

And So On.

Occhi

A*P*E stood for "American Puritan Ethic"

[[wcip]Angel]

We are not denying the fact that the small group of violent fundamentalist don't "got game". They're a very impressive group of people who's done som extraordinary things. That's not the issue. The issue is that there's a whole lot of people being grouped together with these maniacs.

I don't suspect there were that many nazis who used the christian faith as a tool for their socio-political campaign compared to the overall number of Christians, but I'll be damned if I - a Christian - was to be compared with those animals that executed millions of people 60 years ago.

It needs to be said over and over, that these violent assholes are *not* to be associated with the muslim community at large, not because we're trying to trivialise the problem, but because we're highlighting another aspect of it; namely those caught in the crossfire between zealous fundamentalist muslims and the rest of the world.

edit:

On the lighter side of things, I just read an article that stated that when one of the local merchants heard about the cartoons he imported 100 Norwegian flags because he knew there's be market for selling them. You gotta love a country whose primary form of demonstration is flag-burning, especially to the point where vendors and sales-people can anticipate when it's going to occur and make sure that they're supplied with enough flags. If that's not the beating heart of capitalism, I don't know what is!

[Assur]

[quote=Occhidiangela,Feb 7 2006, 05:11 PM]

It was a small, dedicated force under Garibaldi that took Sicily from the Austrians.

Small nit. Garibaldi took Sicily from the Bourbon dynasty ruling the Kingdom of Both Sicilys. When they took on the Austrians in 1866 they got stomped but gained Venice and the other territories they wanted because they were allied with Prussia.

[jahcs]

We are not denying the fact that the small group of violent fundamentalist don't "got game". They're a very impressive group of people who's done som extraordinary things. That's not the issue. The issue is that there's a whole lot of people being grouped together with these maniacs.
[right][snapback]101433[/snapback][/right]

I agree with your premise. The problem is that even if .1% of Muslims are willing to do violence we have over a million* angry Muslims rioting over cartoons.

*Roughly 1 billion Muslims times .001 equals 1,000,000.

[Occhidiangela]

It was a small, dedicated force under Garibaldi that took Sicily from the Austrians.

Small nit. Garibaldi took Sicily from the Bourbon dynasty ruling the Kingdom of Both Sicilys. When they took on the Austrians in 1866 they got stomped but gained Venice and the other territories they wanted because they were allied with Prussia.
[right][snapback]101434[/snapback][/right]

True enough, they fought the Austrians later, well played. I oughta know better, I read Trevalain's second volume on Garibaldi just this past Thanksgiving. *blushes* Getting sloppy.

FWIW: Italian Bourbon is only a bunch of aristocrats, nothing to drink. What a bad idea. :shuriken:

Occhi

[Occhidiangela]

Angel,Feb 7 2006, 12:45 PM]It needs to be said over and over, that these violent assholes are *not* to be associated with the muslim community at large, not because we're trying to trivialise the problem, but because we're highlighting another aspect of it; namely those caught in the crossfire between zealous fundamentalist muslims and the rest of the world.
[right][snapback]101433[/snapback][/right]

They are a part of it, whether we will or no, and will continue to be so long as the greater part puts up with them. Sorta like "how long will you put up with Drunk Driving?" In America, until about the mid 1980's, when a small group of people took on an entire cultural issue and fought like hell to get it changed.

Is there any Muslim who feels empowered to make change like that OTHER THAN a terrorist? The name of the bloody doctrine is "submission" which is rather convenient for Kings and princes, don't you think? Islam's core philosophy and autocratic governance go hand in hand.

Occhi

[whyBish]

They are a part of it, whether we will or no, and will continue to be so long as the greater part puts up with them.  Sorta like "how long will you put up with Drunk Driving?"  In America, until about the mid 1980's, when a small group of people took on an entire cultural issue and fought like hell to get it changed.

Is there any Muslim who feels empowered to make change like that OTHER THAN a terrorist?  The name of the bloody doctrine is "submission" which is rather convenient for Kings and princes, don't you think?  Islam's core philosophy and autocratic governance go hand in hand.

Occhi
[right][snapback]101480[/snapback][/right]

You are assuming that the muslim community at large:
a ) Are putting up with it
b ) have the ability to change it.

I have no clue about the situation in the rest of the world, but in NZ the muslim community denounces violence publicly and often. The protests against the cartoons here were peaceful (although, your media misdirection point is well noted, when reports here went on about muslims rioting etc. and took 30 sec or so before they actually mentioned that it wasn't in NZ) And if the local Muslim community had links to terrorist and/or violent organisations overseas, then they wouldn't have been able to immigrate (Saying "hey, Mr Osama, my longtime friend, please stop your bombings" is probably enough of an admitted connection to make them face legal action here)

[Occhidiangela]

You are assuming that the muslim community at large:
a ) Are putting up with it
b ) have the ability to change it.

Not so, whyBish, particularly on part b. My comment indicates that I do not believe that "the Muslim community at large" is empowered or able to change.

The "putting up with it" is the effect of feeling powerless, or of being indifferent, or a bit of both. It is the norm for sheep in any society, to include my own.

I have no clue about the situation in the rest of the world, but in NZ the muslim community denounces violence publicly and often.

These Kiwi Muslims influence the greater Muslim community how effectively? Please pardon my cynicism, but their objection is like me sitting on my roof and shouting about the litter in downtown Houston. (I live in Corpus Christi.)

The protests against the cartoons here were peaceful (although, your media misdirection point is well noted, when reports here went on about muslims rioting etc. and took 30 sec or so before they actually mentioned that it wasn't in NZ) 

I doff my chapeau to those rational persons. :) May I suggest that the Kiwi cultural norms predominate?

And if the local Muslim community had links to terrorist and/or violent organisations overseas, then they wouldn't have been able to immigrate  (Saying "hey, Mr Osama, my longtime friend, please stop your bombings" is probably enough of an admitted connection to make them face legal action here)
[right][snapback]101516[/snapback][/right]

The Muslim networks in Indonesia and the Philippines are extensive. How sure are you that their tendrils have not reached beloved Kiwi land? Under Mao's theory of revolutionary warfare, the killer fish swim among much larger schools of relatively harmless fish, using them for cover, until a good opportunity to strike arises. The sharks may simply be biding their time in your homeland.

Hopefully not.

Occhi

EDIT for messed up tags and goofing up a sentence.

[kandrathe]

...Under Mao's theory of revolutionary warfare, the killer fish swim among much larger schools of relatively harmless fish, using them for cover, until a good opportunity to strike arises. The sharks may simply be biding their time in your homeland.
...
[right][snapback]101569[/snapback][/right]

Or, worse. In most insurgency handbooks the sharks work to get some of the otherwise peaceful killed, then treat the victims as martyrs, have dramatic and public funerals with a procession through the streets where they can riot and repeat the process over and over again.

There are so many ways that sharks can use the large schools of fish, not the least of which is a form of "useful idiot" to provide an ideological smoke screen. Peaceful muslims are caught between supporting Islam and supporting extremism, so in defending Islam they appear to be defending extremism. When peaceful muslims do raise a voice to denounce extremism, the press does not report it since it is not provocative enough. In a way similiar to overworked parents/teachers where only the naughty kids get any attention. So, the Western media are also useful idiots for the islamic extremists.

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement, reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam. Bruce S. Thornton, FrontPageMagazine.com"

"Elements within the British establishment were notoriously sympathetic to Hitler. Today the Islamists enjoy similar support. In the 1930s it was Edward VIII, aristocrats and the Daily Mail; this time it is left-wing activists, The Guardian and sections of the BBC. They may not want a global theocracy, but they are like the West’s apologists for the Soviet Union — useful idiots. Anthony Browne, The Times"

[Occhidiangela]

Peaceful muslims are caught between supporting Islam and supporting extremism, so in defending Islam they appear to be defending extremism.  ==snip==  So, the Western media are also useful idiots for the islamic extremists.

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us today.  Bruce S. Thornton, FrontPageMagazine.com"

Mr Brown launched into the Godwin Zone immediately, even though he was not in a Usenet discussion. Good for him, London's Blitz is an appropriate analogue to the terror bombings at the train stations.

As to the Frontpage piece:

Yet the history of the conflict and the words of most Middle Easterners themselves tell us that the real issue is not the Palestinians, but simply the existence of Israel itself.

This thought is not a core talking point in Washington's current information campaign. They react to the Holocaust denial diatribes (who cares that someone undermines his own credibility with such a rant?) more forcefully than the core political Gordian knot in the Levant. Like Alexander, GWB and friends consider cutting the knot a valid method of untying it.

Trying to "play it both ways" provides golden opportunities to fool one's self while trying to fool others. Does anyone have the moral courage to do a "Bottoms Up Review" of the strategic value of Israel as a US ally? The Defense Department has to do Bottoms Up Reviews frequently, why not State? Hmmmmm. Is the ghost of Alger Hiss still haunting Foggy Bottom?

Occhi

[kandrathe]

...  Does anyone have the moral courage to do a "Bottoms Up Review" of the strategic value of Israel as a US ally?  The Defense Department has to do Bottoms Up Reviews frequently, why not State? ...
[right][snapback]101595[/snapback][/right]

I would say that the DOD has a strategic vision that extends beyond election cycles. While DOS does maintain its historical relationships, their friends list changes every four to eight years. But, I'm more struck by the entire concept of "value of Israel", not just strategic and not just as a US ally.

Ally of the US or not, at this point in time Isreal exists, and has the means (nuclear if neccesary) to maintain its territorial position, while it's enemies are tooling to provide either a MAD, or just insane juxtaposition to the IDF. The Palestinians have no political power, other than causing social strife, in which to negotiate with Isreal, while some middle east nations (namely Iran, and Syria) still cling to militarism as a means to pressure Isreal and its defenders (Europe and the US). Would Isreal stand without its defenders? I think so.

Isreal is a bit unique in the region because most of the Isreali's are transplanted Europeans. Their values are European and Hebrew, and not Arabic or Islamic. Their values and culture are more like Europes and the US, rather than middle eastern. There are other such nations in the world (e.g. Liberia) which from a social and political point of view, we can better relate and therefore ally. Maybe our close ties to Isreal have something to do with Henry Kissinger, or other powerful Jewish political leadership. :) When I was younger I never realized he was Jewish, since he always seemed to be an American to me.

[Occhidiangela]

Isreal is a bit unique in the region because most of the Isreali's are transplanted Europeans.  Their values are European and Hebrew, and not Arabic or Islamic.  Their values and culture are more like Europes and the US, rather than middle eastern.  There are other such nations in the world (e.g. Liberia) which from a social and political point of view, we can better relate and therefore ally.  Maybe our close ties to Isreal have something to do with Henry Kissinger, or other powerful Jewish political leadership.  :)  When I was younger I never realized he was Jewish, since he always seemed to be an American to me.
[right][snapback]101609[/snapback][/right]

I will leave the lobbying issues on that score to another thread, and merely point out the double digit billions going to Israel annually as aid and "forgiven loans" beyond the Camp David bribe money they and Egypt (and I think later Jordan) get to not fight one another. I imagine some other hostile nations wonder why they don't get paid off at that rate. ;)

The Camp Guinness Accords, for example, could provide 5 billion per year to the Irish economy on the condition that the fighting stop. I wonder how that would go over.

*BONK*
:blink:
Ouch!

*Hey, who would that be, a throwin' that Shilleilagh at me?*

Occhi

[jahcs]

Isreal is a bit unique in the region because most of the Isreali's are transplanted Europeans.  Their values are European and Hebrew, and not Arabic or Islamic.  Their values and culture are more like Europes and the US, rather than middle eastern.
[right][snapback]101609[/snapback][/right]

Quick factsheet to illustrate your assertion ;) :

Ethnic groups: 
Jewish 80.1% (Europe/America-born 32.1%, Israel-born 20.8%, Africa-born 14.6%, Asia-born 12.6%), non-Jewish 19.9% (mostly Arab) (1996 est.) 
Religions: 
Jewish 76.5%, Muslim 15.9%, Arab Christians 1.7%, other Christian 0.4%, Druze 1.6%, unspecified 3.9% (2003) 

CIA.GOV -- All kinds of cool info at a glance here.

[Occhidiangela]

Quick factsheet to illustrate your assertion ;) :
CIA.GOV    --    All kinds of cool info at a glance here.
[right][snapback]101641[/snapback][/right]

Or is that "faulty Intel?" Where are those Wahabis of Mass Demonstration, really? :lol:

Occhi